Jump to content

The Folly of Ignoring Climate Change


Recommended Posts

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.

Edited by robosmith
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

Which is why it’s very important to develop alternative methods of energy generation.  

So far the only feasible energy for the hundreds of millions of vehicles, ships, and aircraft is fossil fuels.  There is nothing that would come even close to replacing fossil fuels and the oil industry.  The world energy consumption is based on the profitable production of fossil fuels.  Companies are not going to switch to alternative energy source unless there is the same money to be made in it, which there isn't.  That is just a fact of life.  

The world does not operate on idealism of teenagers or enviro fanatics.  That doesn't pay for the energy industry or provide the energy needed.

Edited by blackbird
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

You KNOW you have LOST the argument when all you have is hyperbolic DRIVEL.

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.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

1.   Look, let's go from the beginning. You wanted to insinuate there was no science or scientists involved in the coming ice age theory, that it was all media.

2.I listed people who thought they were talking science that were involved in the theory. I said Hansen wrote a model used by ice ageists.

3. You asked for a cite. 

4. Jimmy says "Who me? No, I just had a program for my venus studies they used to create the model."

5. At that point it becomes who do you believe.

6. Also, at the time, Hansen was Rasool's subordinate. Also even in his own explanation he writes how he supported the project. He says just as a useful experiment. Hansen also gave advice to the co-author of the paper Steven Schneider.

7. So if your original point is no global warming scientists were involved in the ice age theory forget about Hansen or even Barrack Obama's science adviser John Holdren, I mentioned earlier. Rasool and Co-author of the ice age paper, Steven Schneider proves your original point that scientists were not involved in the ice-age theory wrong. 

shs-hansen-rasool.jpg

Steve Schneider (left), Jim Hansen (centre), and S. Ichtiaque Rasool (right) at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, circa 1971. Image copyright: Stephen H. Schneider

1. I think I said there may be some scientists promoting it but that it wasn't generally accepted the way climate change is now.  Just as there are climate scientists today who think that CO2 isn't the cause of climate change.

2. Well wrote software... wrote a model... sure but there's nothing saying that Hansen was mistaken, that the Ice Age paper was mistaken, or that Hansen believed there was an ice age theory coming.  The only thing that could be used for was to imply Hansen did some kind of about face and believed in the Ice Age theory imo.

3. Yes you provided a cite, that's all that I can ask for.

4. And it's a credible response, especially given that the cite you provided specifically says that also inside the Washington Post article... not in the framing language that the blogger added above

5. Well... we have Hansen's words, we have the Post article ... that agrees with what he said... and you have the blogger who wrote a headline and a lead-in line that contradict that.  You just look at the reasons and it makes sense.  If Hansen was lying then why isn't his name on that paper as an author ?  

6. Yes this is all accurate.  Even if the paper failed peer review it's part of science, although it's on the junk pile of failed theories... 

7.  Ok, you are right on this - he supported a paper that promoted global cooling but there weren't many papers that supported that theory is my point.  There were more papers at that time, I believe, that supported global warming and studies before that that postulated the same.

 

All good...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, robosmith said:

: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 CREDIBITY on EVOLUTION.

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.

 

blindfold.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour 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.

 

blindfold.jpg

New Zealand?

Over 80% of their electricity comes from renewable green power. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Rebound said:

New Zealand?

Over 80% of their electricity comes from renewable green power. 

New Zealand has a small population.  It is easy for such a small country to do what they want.  It would be impossible for larger countries that have millions of cars, trains, ships, and aircraft to operate without fossil fuels.  The world needs fossil fuels to function.  Progressives and environmentalists live in la la land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

 

blindfold.jpg

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.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, robosmith said:

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.

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.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, robosmith said:

Gore has been a VISIONARY on both the Internet and Global Warming.

What have you done besides drag your heels?

Face it. The evidence clearly shows Big Fat AL Gore is a backstabbing liar.

I've accomplished lots of things. Like...raising 3 beautiful kids and providing each with a house. 

Not too shabby for a heal dragger eh?

Edited by Nationalist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, robosmith said:

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.

Thus...when your body dies...so will your consciousness. 

Blackbirds will continue to exist and perhaps even live more corporeal lives.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, blackbird said:

So far the only feasible energy for the hundreds of millions of vehicles, ships, and aircraft is fossil fuels.  There is nothing that would come even close to replacing fossil fuels and the oil industry.  The world energy consumption is based on the profitable production of fossil fuels.  Companies are not going to switch to alternative energy source unless there is the same money to be made in it, which there isn't.  That is just a fact of life.  

The world does not operate on idealism of teenagers or enviro fanatics.  That doesn't pay for the energy industry or provide the energy needed.

You state that as if it is an immutable fact, without any explanation. And of all the energy sources, petroleum is the only one which is absolutely finite; it will run out. Wind, sun, and even nuclear power are effectively infinite. Hydro and geothermal are infinite but limited in capacity and availability.  
 

Fifty percent of the electricity in Iowa comes from wind. What happens if they double the number of windmills? Will they ever have a period of time with zero wind anywhere in the state? No, they will not.  
 

But we don’t need to eliminate fossil fuel use, only supplement it, and eventually reduce it.  We’ll have cars and generators and especially airplanes consuming petroleum for another hundred years.  

Edited by Rebound
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rebound said:

You state that as if it is an immutable fact, without any explanation. And of all the energy sources, petroleum is the only one which is absolutely finite; it will run out. Wind, sun, and even nuclear power are effectively infinite. Hydro and geothermal are infinite but limited in capacity and availability.  
 

Fifty percent of the electricity in Iowa comes from wind. What happens if they double the number of windmills? Will they ever have a period of time with zero wind anywhere in the state? No, they will not.  
 

But we don’t need to eliminate fossil fuel use, only supplement it, and eventually reduce it.  We’ll have cars and generators and especially airplanes consuming petroleum for another hundred years.  

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.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, robosmith said:

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.

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.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, robosmith said:

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.

Read this article:   Astonishing DNA complexity demolishes neo-Darwinism  

by Alex Williams

quote

The traditional understanding of DNA has recently been transformed beyond recognition. DNA does not, as we thought, carry a linear, one-dimensional, one-way, sequential code—like the lines of letters and words on this page. And the 97% in humans that does not carry protein-coding genes is not, as many people thought, fossilized ‘junk’ left over from our evolutionary ancestors. DNA information is overlapping-multi-layered and multi-dimensional; it reads both backwards and forwards; and the ‘junk’ is far more functional than the protein code, so there is no fossilized history of evolution. No human engineer has ever even imagined, let alone designed an information storage device anything like it. Moreover, the vast majority of its content is metainformation—information about how to use information. Meta-information cannot arise by chance because it only makes sense in context of the information it relates to. Finally, 95% of its functional information shows no sign of having been naturally selected; on the contrary, it is rapidly degenerating! That means Darwin was wrong—natural selection of natural variation does not explain the variety of life on Earth. The best explanation is what the Bible tells us: we were created—as evidenced by the marvels of DNA—but then we fell and now endure the curse of ‘bondage to decay’ by mutations.    unquote

For the rest of the article and save it for reference.  It is mind-boggling.

j21_3_111-117.pdf (creation.com)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,770
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Akalupenn
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...