robosmith
-
Posts
11,327 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
14
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by robosmith
-
-
4 minutes ago, blackbird said:
You believe in the fiction that man is causing climate change when it always has changed. You can't suck the CO2 out of the atmosphere either. Maybe a tiny bit but that won't make any difference. Atheists are the last people on earth to listen to on the climate. They think man is like God and can do anything. Frivilous nonsense.
Every hear of nuclear winter? Or do you also believe that won't affect the climate?
FWIW, I am NOT an atheist; I am agnostic. Because I don't allow mere belief to affect my judgement.
If a profit can be made sucking CO2 out of the atmosphere, they will SCALE IT UP and make a big difference. Duh.
Ever hear the Parable of the drowning man?
-
15 minutes ago, blackbird said:
That will never stop climate change. Man cannot control the climate. It is fiction to think he can. The amount of CO2 reduction will never affect the climate and a significant reduction is practically impossible. Only in the imagination of environmental radicals. Better to learn to adapt to climate change. The fall of mankind caused a faulty planet with all the severe weather. That cannot be stopped. Learning to adapt to it is the only thing that can be done.
What man can do, we can undo. If only you had the faith in the ingenuity of man that you have in magic....
We now have machines that can suck CO2 out of the atmosphere, and maybe someday make a profit doing that.
-
5 minutes ago, blackbird said:
It was obvious by their actions they did not believe in God and the Bible. They were murderers and killed millions imposing their ideology. Is that what you want?
Implementing modern energy policy has nothing to do with 20th century fascists so take ^this shit and shove it.
Externalizing costs of fossil fuel energy pollution would be much more in that line.
The average US cost of weather catastrophes since 1980 has been $53B/year.
Over the last 5 years, it has been $158B/year.
Not to mention the LIVES LOST.
It would be STUPID to not switch to renewables ASAP where feasible.
-
2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:
Stop lying. Ukraine threatened Russia with NATO at their doorstep. Russia did what the US would have done - they did what Kennedy did in Cuba in '61.
Kennedy never invaded Cuba. Didn't even provide support for the Cuban exiles who died on the beach.
It is you who should stop lying.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, blackbird said:
That's what Lenin, Stalin, and Mao thought.
You don't know what they "thought," all you know is what they told the sheeple.
-
Just now, blackbird said:
Prime examples are Lenin, Stalin, Chairman Mao, and Hitler with their visions. Killed 100 million people and put billions more into totalitarianism and no human rights. Vision without God and his word are evil. No thanks. Total failure.
They were NEVER progressives. Just power lust.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, blackbird said:
You picked a good pseudonym for yourself. robosmith describes yourself as a robot. You do not listen to reason or anything anyone else says. Just keep repeating childish one liner rebuttles. Total waste of time.
Nope. robosmith means FIXER of robots. I listened to you and only heard what I've heard hundreds of times before.
Ignorance spouted by true believers who desperately cling to the religion they were taught as a child.
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, blackbird said:
You have answered nothing. You can't explain anything, but you hold onto the debunked theory of a complex universe and life happening purely by chance. Ridiculous and nonsensical. You answered nothing.
Just because YOU WANT to believe an ancient understanding of the world, does not make it true.
In ancient times, there were gods invented to explain everything that frightened man and he could not understand.
Educated people understand FAR MORE today. There is no NEED for the god default; it just holds back true understanding.
-
10 minutes ago, blackbird said:
The fossil fuel power does not generate huge pollution. CO2 is not pollution. It is an essential part of life on planet earth. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere generated by man is miniscule. 97% of the CO2 is natural.
IT is pollution and causes warming. Just look at the hell hole called Venus.
The 97% of natural CO2 emitted DOES NOT increase atmospheric concentrations because it is RECYCLED by biological processes.
Only fossil fuel CO2 currently contributes the the HUGE increase in atmospheric (and oceanic) CO2 since the start of the industrial age.
Unlike in ancient times when MEGA-volcanos were a significant contributor.
10 minutes ago, blackbird said:You do not build a better future by rejecting God and his revelation to man.
All you have to have is VISION and the will to make it happen. Prime examples: Gore and Musk.
10 minutes ago, blackbird said:Government cannot build a better future by imposing it's morally bankrupt ideology on people.
IT does not always but certainly CAN, your cynicism notwithstanding.
10 minutes ago, blackbird said:Government cannot just impose a totally different source of energy on a world that is built on an established energy source that is proven to work produces millions of jobs.
Sure it can. We just need to educate the small minds so they can understand new VISIONS.
10 minutes ago, blackbird said:Government authoritarianism never works. The woke are bent on destroying society. Environmental radicals slash tires and block roads but it won't help. It is criminal anarchy.
Have you been to Egypt? Know the history of the Roman Empire? Great things have been accomplished by great governments throughout history. Esp in the USA, which has put men on the moon, and built amazing supercomputers among much other PROGRESS.
-
53 minutes ago, blackbird said:
You did not read my post very well, if at all. It is a question of what is rational. Why do you reject reasoning, logic and rational thinking? I have explained to you there is no other explanation for the information that is required to operate life and the universe. Vast information in a cell which I explained to you doesn't arrive by random.
"a meaningless accident of atoms" does not explain anything and it certainly does not explain how the vast volumes of information came into existence. Random movements of atoms does not produce complex information structures. Claiming accident of atoms can produce something complex and useful has long ago been rejected by many scientists. Professor Philip Stott, a scientist and mathematician will tell you that the mathematical law of probability proves there is not enough time in the universe for the right atoms, molecules, or chemicals to come together to produce life. This has been mathematically carefully calculated and is reasonable.
He gave an example by explaining if you put a monkey in front of a typewriter and let him type random characters, how long do you think it would take the monkey to type the complete works of Shakespeare? That is what the idea of random chance processes is claiming could happen to create a living cell. It simply could not happen by random. A living organism is vastly complex. The data and machinery in a cell is so complex and intricate that biological science is amazed. It could never happen by accident.
The theory that life could begin by random processes has never been proven by any empirical science. It simply can't be done. You would probably have a better chance of a monkey typing on a keyboard or on a piano producing something meaningful.
The other question you ignored is when you said "an accident of atoms" where did the atoms come from? Where did the laws of physics and gravity all come from? Where did matter itself come from? You conveniently ignore the reality that the complex universe could not come into existence without a superior external power or an intelligent designer as we say. Go ahead if you want to hang onto a blind, childish way of looking at things. You also have not explained the meaning of life if everything is just a chemical accident. According to you humans are just a chemical blob that accidentally happened to come along. Not logical at all. But I guess ignorance is bliss until one knows deep down they will have to face their Creator one day because as the bible says, we are appointed to die and after this the judgment. Fools ignore the truth because they think they can avoid accountability that way. It doesn't work like that. Everyone will still be accountable. This universe does not exist for nothing. We are not here by nothing, for nothing and to just disappear as nothing.
It is you who is holding on to ^this childish STORY which cannot be proven.
In an infinite universe, EVERYTHING can and WILL happen through completely random processes.
Maybe some day you will understand, but I highly doubt it because you believe you already KNOW the answer is the story about god(s) that were invented to lessen the anxiety of the ancients who invented a god to explain the sun and everything else they didn't understand.
Your "scientist" started with BELIEF, and then searched for and invented a semi-rational explanation he calls science.
-
1 hour ago, blackbird said:
I know it is hard for an idealist to understand reality, but it is not that complicated. The oil industry is thriving because there is centuries of oil and gas still in the ground and it is a profitable business. There are millions of users who run cars, trucks, motorcycles, buses, ships of all kinds, and aircraft of all kinds. That is just how the world is. You can't change it by waving a wand or by government decree as Trudeau thinks. Society is deeply built on the oil and gas industry. I really don't know how to explain it in any other way.
Good for Iowa if they can make a good living on wind power. That simply would not work as an alternative for the oil and gas industry. It would not provide a fraction of the energy required. Wind turbines are an ugly eyesore on the landscape. I have seen them in southern Alberta and would not want those spread across the country. There are also lots of problems with wind power. They don't generate enough power for all the cities, they don't provide the power for millions of vehicles, etc. and their output varies with the wind and may stop altogether if there is no wind. So they are not realistic alternative to oil and gas.
I think you still missed the point that society functions and depends on the free enterprise system which means where a resource is profitable and there is a big demand, companies invest in it and produce thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in revenue for the country. That is what the oil and gas industry does. There is nothing else on the horizon that could do that. Investors must see the value before they invest. They are not going to switch to something that has no evident large value. Government cannot tell companies where to invest their money. That would be total disaster.
When EVERY building has a wind turbine and solar panels, there will be far less need for central power plants and the huge inefficiencies of power transmission.
Your belief in the "wisdom" of the ancients is entirely consistent with your complete lack of VISION for a BETTER future.
And you completely ignore the huge downsides of fossil fuel power energy POLLUTION, on the climate, air and water.
Coal is the most DEADLY form of energy production, but all other fossil fuels are nearly as unhealthy.
-
3 hours ago, Nationalist said:
Nor will you be.
You will live on, ONLY in the memories you've left to OTHERS still living.
-
3 hours ago, Legato said:
Why the need to shout, as you probably know, empty vessels make the most noise.
Why do YOU need to post DISHONESTLY, LIAR!
-
3 hours ago, Nationalist said:
Thus...when your body dies...so will your consciousness.
Blackbirds will continue to exist and perhaps even live more corporeal lives.
So says the wisdom of the ancients.
Of course there is ZERO evidence of that actually happening, but whatever makes you feel good, right?
That philosophical fallacy is evident in most of your posts.
-
13 minutes ago, blackbird said:
The Bible, which is God's revelation to man, explains how God created the universe in six days. The fact is it was supernatural event. God does not anyone to twist his word to try to make it palatable to skeptics. That is not how God operates. That is not how Bible believers should operate either.
Where did the universe come from? Do you have any idea?
There is no contradiction between the Bible and genuine science which uses the scientific method. Some of the greatest scientists who ever lived in the 16th or 17th centuries believe God created the universe. The Bible tells how God supernaturally created the universe which is probably somewhere around six thousand years ago.
You said creationism is completely based on faith, which is incorrect. Belief in the creation account in the Bible is entirely reasonable for a number of reasons.
I can't go into all of it on these short comment sections, but I will mention just a couple points for consideration.
1. The question of how the universe started or where it came from cannot be answered from a purely secular science point of view. The reason is because logic tells us that every effect had to have a cause. The universe is an effect. Therefore, it had to have a cause. Secondly, since logic tells everyone something (the universe) could not come into existence without a cause. Scientists say the universe is expanding. That means it had to have a beginning at some point in time.
2. Because of the existence of the laws of physics, the complexity of the universe, the motion of the planets around the sun, the existence of atoms, molecules, gravity, etc., it is reasonable to believe there was a supernatural being or intelligent designer who designed and created it all. It is unreasonable to believe the complex universe came into existence without an external supernatural designer-creator. There is no explanation for the existence of everything apart from a supernatural being apart from the creation.
3. Even in a single cell, biological scientists have discovered an immensely complex amount of organized data which directs how the machinery in the cell operates. In fact, there are a number of different streams of data. This is something that was unknown to Darwin in the 19th century. In the last fifty years discoveries have been made that show the vast complexity of living cells. They have vast amounts of data similar to huge computers. Random chance processes as in the theory of evolution cannot add new information which is what is required to operate the vastly complex cells and living structures. This could not have come into existence by any kind of random chance processes as Darwinism claims. Vast amounts of information must be implanted in the beginning by a supernatural being of immense intelligence and infinite power.
4. The final point is a philosophical one. Atheism or Darwinism cannot explain why the universe exists and why mankind exists. According to them we are just some kind of cosmic accident. We are all here from nothing, by nothing, and for nothing. Human emotions, reasoning and intelligence is all just a chemical reaction. That view of the creation is irrational. People that believe that think life has absolutely no purpose and no meaning. So there is no good and no evil. Everyone is just an accident of the chemical or atoms coming together. What a sad way of thinking. But that is the thinking of atheist scientists and others who follow that line of thought. Life is just a meaningless accident of the atoms.
If you don't understand reality, god must be the answer. AKA, the "wisdom" of the ancients.
Or you could redouble your efforts to understand. The god default is the lazy way out for the incompetent.
A meaningless accident of atoms, is a perfectly valid interpretation and there is NO REASON to reject it.
It is man's desire to invent an easy explanation which compels him to believe in magic.
Here: man survives by understanding his environment due to not having superior physical prowess to prevail over stronger predators.
Man is driven to understand reality by an anxiety over failure to survive which was developed by evolution.
Those who were not driven to understand how to survive, died out.
For those things he could not understand, god(s) was invented to relieve that anxiety.
There is no other reason to believe phenomena which lack empirical evidence.
Anyone may CHOOSE the meaning of THEIR LIFE. It can be whatever you want it to be. ?
You may choose mysticism (the god default), but I choose deeper understanding of reality.
-
2 hours ago, blackbird said:
creation.com have a lot of science authorities who contribute to their thousands of articles and videos.
Jonathan Sarfati is one highly qualified scientist who has written several books.
quote
Biography
Creationist Physical Chemist and Spectroscopist
Dr Jonathan Sarfati was born in Ararat, Australia in 1964. He moved to New Zealand as a child and later studied science at Victoria University of Wellington. Dr Sarfati holds citizenships of Australia, New Zealand, and the USA. He obtained a B.Sc. (Hons.) in Chemistry with two physics papers substituted (nuclear and condensed matter physics). His Ph.D. in Chemistry was awarded for a thesis entitled ‘A Spectroscopic Study of some Chalcogenide Ring and Cage Molecules’. He has co-authored papers in mainstream scientific journals on high temperature superconductors and selenium-containing ring and cage-shaped molecules. He also had a co-authored paper on high-temperature superconductors published in Nature when he was 22.
Dr Sarfati has been a Christian since 1984. He has long been interested in apologetics, the defense of the faith, and was a co-founder of the Wellington Christian Apologetics Society (New Zealand). Creation vs evolution is of course a vital area, because of the ramifications for the doctrines of Creation, the Fall which brought death into the world, and their links to the doctrines of the Incarnation, Atonement and Bodily Resurrection of the God-man Jesus Christ.
Dr Sarfati is married to Sherry and they enjoy spending time with their two grand-daughters.
In August 1996, he returned to the country of his birth to take up a position as a research scientist and editorial consultant for Creation Ministries International in Brisbane. In this capacity, he is co-editor of Creation magazine, and also writes and reviews articles for Journal of Creation, CMI’s in-depth peer-reviewed publication, as well as contributing to CMI’s creation.com website.
In 1999, his first book was published—Refuting Evolution, which countered a teachers guidebook by the National Academy of Sciences, Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science, which had been widely circulated and publicized. Refuting Evolution now has 450,000 copies in print. Later that year he was a co-author of the updated and expanded Answers Book [note: now entitled The Creation Answers Book], answering 20 of the most-asked questions about creation/evolution. He later wrote Refuting Evolution 2, countering the PBS Evolution series and an anticreationist article in Scientific American.
In 2004, he wrote Refuting Compromise, defending a straightforward biblical creation timeline and a global flood, and answering biblical and scientific objections, concentrating on the errant teachings of day-age/local flood advocate Hugh Ross. It has been acclaimed as ‘the most powerful biblical and scientific defense of a straightforward view of Genesis creation ever written!’ See the introductory chapter and some reviews.
In 2006, he co-authored 15 Reasons to Take Genesis as History with Don Batten, as a concise reference guide for Christians, including pastors and theologians, why Genesis can be trusted as real history of Creation about 6000 years ago and a global Flood.
In 2008, he finished By Design: Evidence for nature’s Intelligent Designer—the God of the Bible. This demonstrates many examples of design in many areas, shows why chemical evolution can’t explain the origin of first life, and answers many objections to the Intelligent Design movement by invoking the biblical Creation-Fall model.
In 2010, Dr Sarfati wrote The Greatest Hoax on Earth? Refuting Dawkins on evolution, a response to leading atheopath Richard Dawkins’ latest book The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution (see website).
That year, Dr Sarfati emigrated to the USA with his wife to work in the CMI–USA office as author, speaker, apologist, and Head Scientist.
In 2012, he considerably expanded and updated a classic general apologetics book, Christianity for Skeptics, by Dr Steve Kumar of New Zealand. This presents a positive case for the existence of God, the inspiration of the Bible, and the divinity and resurrection of Christ, and answers challenges from suffering, atheism, Eastern philosophy, and Islam. The update now also contains cutting edge material on design in nature, the Christian roots of science, and answering the ‘new atheists’.
In 2015, Dr Sarfati wrote probably his most important and comprehensive book yet: The Genesis Account: A theological, historical, and scientific commentary on Genesis 1–11, almost 800 pages long.
Dr Jonathan Sarfati playing blindfold chess against 12 opponents
Dr Sarfati is also a keen chess player. He is a former New Zealand Chess Champion, and represented New Zealand in three Chess Olympiads, and drew with Boris Spassky, world champion 1969–1972, in a tournament game (those interested in the game score can see this chess site). In 1988, F.I.D.E., the International Chess Federation, awarded him the title of F.I.D.E. Master (FM). Dr Sarfati regularly accepts challenges from multiple players where he plays ‘blindfold’, i.e. from memory without sight or any physical contact with the board, so moves are communicated via a recognized chess notation (See an example at the Croydon Chess Club). Twelve is the most played simultaneously to date—see photo, left. unquote
Here he is playing chess blindfold against 12 people at a time.
There is NO EMPIRICAL SCIENCE that supports creationism because it is COMPLETELY based on FAITH. At best there is PSEUDO-SCIENCE and people attempting to explain their faith in scientific terms.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Nationalist said:
I know nothing of the sort.
What I know...is crashing fossil fuels before we have a replacement, is that act of a blithering idiot.
I also know Gore is an opportunistic little liar and dog.
Gore has been a VISIONARY on both the Internet and Global Warming.
What have you done besides drag your heels?
-
1 hour ago, sharkman said:
You seem literally upset. And you start a thread in which you don’t even to bother to define what you mean by “rightwing”.
Why are you upset when liberals/progressives are in power in both Canada and the US and most of Europe. They are rolling out their agenda on schedule.
Progressives DO NOT control the SCOTUS and they are doing great (and unpopular) damage to this nation.
Right wingers achieved control of the SCOTUS through anti-democratic means using the Electoral College to install Justices NOT favored by the majority. ?
We have, and have long had, MINORITY control of government. AKA, anti-democratic.
-
14 minutes ago, Legato said:
.....
Don't EVER edit my quote to misrepresent what I wrote, LIAR.
-
47 minutes ago, Nationalist said:
Lol..."AHHH! WE ALL GONNA DIIIEEE!!!
Give it up Sally. Your scary monster is exposed for what it really is
You KNOW you have LOST the argument when all you have is hyperbolic DRIVEL.
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, blackbird said:
Do mutations add information? Is that Evolution?
Do mutations add information and is that evolution? - creation.com
:LMAO: :LMAO: :LMAO:
You picked the wrong website if you're trying to CITE SCIENCE.
Creation Ministries International is NOT a science authority and has NO CREDIBILITY on EVOLUTION.
-
2
-
-
55 minutes ago, blackbird said:
There is no evidence that new species were ever formed by evolution. No fossils showing it have been found. That shows the whole thing is a fraud.
Fossils have been found with some intact DNA, and that demonstrates mutations which CAUSE evolution.
EVERY mutated animal is a TRANSITION to a new species WHEN that mutation gives the organism a survival advantage.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, Nationalist said:
I read your cite, and as usual, naked links DO NOT support your claims.
IF you actually believe it supports your claim, QUOTE the relevant EVIDENCE HERE.
Of course Revelle's "wait and see" attitude is irrelevant TODAY. We HAVE ALREADY SEEN, and Gore was RIGHT.
The temporary cooling of Revelle's time has ENDED and WARMING is even worse than before.
Fortunately the WORLD agrees with GORE and is TAKING STEPS to slow down the impending disaster.
-
41 minutes ago, blackbird said:
You proved your ignorance. Viruses have always mutated. Mutation is not evolution. There was no change from one species to another.
The FACT is, mutation is an inherent PART of evolution.
And multiple survivable mutations OVER TIME, does SOMETIMES create NEW SPECIES provided those mutations give the organism a SURVIVAL ADVANTAGE.
Nordstream Pipeline - Reichstag V2.0
in Federal Politics in the United States
Posted
Ukraine would seem to have much to gain from disabling Putin's revenue source.