The Folly of Ignoring Climate Change

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Science isn't much better than religion nowadays, is it Hodad?

Is the Faucian orthodoxy, which censors, lies, backtracks and even redefines words to suit their fancy, that much better than the R Catholic orthodoxy that imprisoned Galileo?

Regardless of whether or not God/creation exists, religion Christianity has served a greater purpose, and formed the bedrock of a society where humans were able to grow into the inclusive and progressive society that we enjoy today.

When science is for the betterment of humanity I appreciate it, but as our society becomes more and more "Christianity-free" and more reliant upon the new left-wing ideologies & science, it is devolving into something far less than what it was. Senators didn't twerk upside-down when America was a more Christian place.

I don't ever wanna go back to where Iran is right now, but we need to get back to the middle ground, and shitting on religion is counterproductive for our society imo. 

I never would have expected you to endorse "progressive society." Are you sure you meant to type that?

Most conservatives want to devolve to the 1950s or even the 1850s.

[Nationalist]

2 hours ago, Rebound said:

Carefully consider this: In the 1970’s, scientists realized that Earth’s ozone layer was being destroyed by CFC’s… the refrigerant used in air conditioners and the propellant used in make aerosols. 
 

We didn’t have a bunch of jerks claiming that scientists were getting rich off of this or making up “fake science.” We just solved the problem. You can no longer buy aerosols with CFC’s and refrigerators use different chemicals and AC systems need to have recovery systems. And it’s worked.  
 

So why the opposition to reducing carbon emissions? One thing only: Petroleum Companies. And they funded GOP-related groups so much that the GOP decided their “team” would fight science. 
 

The science itself is overwhelming.  The petroleum industry offered cash bounties to scientists to publish papers questioning MMGW.  That is NOT science, it is politics. You fund research, not conclusions.  
 

The conclusions are very easy to see: We’ve been accurately tracking temperature for well over 100 years. We can measure the age of glacier and polar ice. We have measured the ebb and flow of arctic and Antarctic ice for a long time. The evidence is very consistent. 
 

However, you are ignoring the point of this thread: The folly is in letting foreign nations take the lead in developing the energy technologies of the future. We will not rely on petroleum forever. Iowa already generates half its electricity from wind. The national average is 9% wind power already. The technology works. 

Aerosols did not form the base of the global economy.

Fossil Fuels do...and the "science" is not overwhelming at all. In fact, it rather underwhelming.

You want a different source of energy? OK

You wanna collapse the existing base of the global economy and primary source of energy BEFORE we find a reliable replacement? UP YOURS! That's stupid and suicidal.

Find a replacement. Make it affordable and ample. THEN...we'll deal.

[robosmith]

14 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

As you know, the fossil evidence does not support that. Dinosaurs hold the record so far. Then possibly the trilobites. I'd have to check.

Individual freedom is essential for innovation. Even the Commies released their scientists from the gulags when they needed a rocket capable of putting a man into orbit or a nuclear armed bomber that could reach America.

ONLY individual freedom which SERVES the good of the whole, NOT that which serves the individual at the expense of the whole.

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

I can't resort to magic to get answers.

My rebuttal can only be that we can see stars further away than 6 thousand light years...a fraction of the distance between us and our own galactic core. We can see galaxies full of them all around...millions...billions of light years distant.

When you look through Satan's telescope.

[DogOnPorch]

Just now, robosmith said:

ONLY individual freedom which SERVES the good of the whole, NOT that which serves the individual at the expense of the whole.

 

Yes, Stalin & Mao liked doing it that way, too.

[DogOnPorch]

Just now, Hodad said:

When you look through Satan's telescope.

 

Of course...

[robosmith]

1 minute ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Yes, Stalin & Mao liked doing it that way, too.

Yes, both Stalin and Mao exercised individual freedom to SERVE THEMSELVES as dictators

[DogOnPorch]

7 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Yes, both Stalin and Mao exercised individual freedom to SERVE THEMSELVES as dictators

 

Communism is always a dictatorship.

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, blackbird said:

Natural selection and evolution are not the same thing.  This article explains why.  There is such a thing as natural selection, but it cannot be defined as Darwinian evolution.  Natural selection did not cause the molecules to man type of evolution claimed by evolutionists.  Basically natural selection does not add the kind of information that is required for a living cell to evolve to a higher species or different species.

You can read the article at:

Refuting Evolution chapter 2: Variation and natural selection versus evolution - creation.com

Lolwut? What was the title of Darwin's seminal treatise on evolution? Oh, yeah... On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection.  Your religious apologetics site didn't cover that?

Natural selection is the driver of evolution. It does not "add" information at all, of any kind. It describes the process by which some mutations survive and become heritable traits while others do not, due primarily to environmental conditions.

I see now that you've added young-Earth creationism to your resume. At that point you've actively dismissed almost all established science, biology, astronomy, physics, geology, etc. etc.  So what is the point of pretending that some of it works? Just give the middle finger to gravity too, and tell us that angels hold our feet to the Earth?

 

Edited October 3, 2022 by Hodad

[DogOnPorch]

Oh...trilobites win at 270 million years on Earth.

 

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

I can't resort to magic to get answers.

My rebuttal can only be that we can see stars further away than 6 thousand light years...a fraction of the distance between us and our own galactic core. We can see galaxies full of them all around...millions...billions of light years distant.

As I said, I believe age was built in when it was created.  That means light from distant starts would appear millions of light years distant.   Remember God created the universe supernaturally.  So it would have to have an apparent age built in at the moment of creation.  Scientists say the universe is expanding.  Therefore it had a beginning.  The question many ask is where did it come from?  Something can not come from nothing without a supernatural being behind it.  Every effect has a cause.  

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

It is easy to accept both Genesis and evolution. You ignore an important fact about the Bible: It was not written for modern man, it was written for very ancient man.  And if we take all we know of how science describes the creation of the world, and explain it to ancient man, we get a story like Genesis. So we can easily accept both together. 

Of course God wrote inspired men to write the Bible for all of man.  Why would he only write to one particular group in one particular period of time.  The Bible itself refutes that notion anyway.  It was written over a period of 1,500 years by 40 different authors.  Much of it's information and teachings are eternal and directed to all ages.

Genesis account of creation is a literal account of God creating everything in six days and resting on the seventh.  Nowhere does it say it is allegorical.  It is absolutely literal.  There is no room for Darwinism which is a denial of the Bible and a teaching that man is just the result of accidental chemical reactions.  If you go by that teaching, man was just an accidental occurrence by nothing and for nothing.  That goes completely contrary to the Holy Scripture.  

Edited October 3, 2022 by blackbird

[DogOnPorch]

8 minutes ago, blackbird said:

As I said, I believe age was built in when it was created.  That means light from distant starts would appear millions of light years distant.   Remember God created the universe supernaturally.  So it would have to have an apparent age built in at the moment of creation.  Scientists say the universe is expanding.  Therefore it had a beginning.  The question many ask is where did it come from?  Something can not come from nothing without a supernatural being behind it.  Every effect has a cause.  

 

You believe it. But to me it is magic.

You still get another beer around the campfire.

[blackbird]

40 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Lolwut? What was the title of Darwin's seminal treatise on evolution? Oh, yeah... On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection.  Your religious apologetics site didn't cover that?

Natural selection is the driver of evolution. It does not "add" information at all, of any kind. It describes the process by which some mutations survive and become heritable traits while others do not, due primarily to environmental conditions.

I see now that you've added young-Earth creationism to your resume. At that point you've actively dismissed almost all established science, biology, astronomy, physics, geology, etc. etc.  So what is the point of pretending that some of it works? Just give the middle finger to gravity too, and tell us that angels hold our feet to the Earth?

 

If you want to make accusations up and invent things, be my guest.   I never said I dismissed science, biology, astronomy, etc.  I actually grew up with a great interest in science.  I had my own lab in the basement when I was about 12 years old.  The local pharmacist could supply me with almost anything I asked for.   I only reject things like Darwinism, which conflict with the truth as revealed in Scripture.  Darwinism is NOT science.  You claim everything anyone says or promotes under the heading of science, is science, but that is not true.

 

[blackbird]

47 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Lolwut? What was the title of Darwin's seminal treatise on evolution? Oh, yeah... On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection.  Your religious apologetics site didn't cover that?

Natural selection is the driver of evolution. It does not "add" information at all, of any kind. It describes the process by which some mutations survive and become heritable traits while others do not, due primarily to environmental conditions.

I see now that you've added young-Earth creationism to your resume. At that point you've actively dismissed almost all established science, biology, astronomy, physics, geology, etc. etc.  So what is the point of pretending that some of it works? Just give the middle finger to gravity too, and tell us that angels hold our feet to the Earth?

 

Lot of nonsense in that post.  Creationists who study the evolution/creation debate often believe natural selection is a fact, but with the provision it does not have the same meaning as evolutionists claim.  You have to study it to understand exactly what creationists believe.  I've already explained there is no evidence that evolution took place.  Evolution as claimed by Darwinists cannot be proven and was never demonstrated in an experiment.   It just doesn't occur.  A vast amount of information is in cells.  Where could this information come from without an intelligent designer creator who put it there in the first place?

Edited October 3, 2022 by blackbird

[robosmith]

27 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Lot of nonsense in that post.  Creationists who study the evolution/creation debate often believe natural selection is a fact, but with the provision it does not have the same meaning as evolutionists claim.  You have to study it to understand exactly what creationists believe.  I've already explained there is no evidence that evolution took place.  Evolution as claimed by Darwinists cannot be proven and was never demonstrated in an experiment.   It just doesn't occur.  A vast amount of information is in cells.  Where could this information come from without an intelligent designer creator who put it there in the first place?

What "intelligent designer creator" created the "intelligent designer creator who put it there in the first place"?

By YOUR THESIS, "It just doesn't occur."

Not understanding the original cause of the effect of the universe, does not mean there wasn't one.

It only means we have yet to understand/discover it. ?

If you just ASSUME that "god did it," you never will.

Edited October 3, 2022 by robosmith

[blackbird]

3 minutes ago, robosmith said:

What "intelligent designer creator" created the "intelligent designer creator who put it there in the first place"?

By YOUR THESIS, "It just doesn't occur."

Not understanding the original cause of the effect of the universe, does not mean there wasn't one.

It only means we have yet to understand/discover it. ?

If you just ASSUME that "god did it," you never will.

Who created God is an old dumb question that atheists ask.

God is a supernatural spirit that has always existed.  

The universe is made of matter or energy.  As I've said many times, something does not create itself.  It had to come from somewhere.   The only explanation is that God created it.  God is not a part of the material universe.  He is separate from it.  God is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient.  But God is also a holy God and cannot do evil.  He is perfection.  The world is an imperfect place because of the fall of man.  His remedy for anyone is to believe in Jesus Christ as lord and savior.  That is the only remedy.   

[robosmith]

5 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Who created God is an old dumb question that atheists ask.

God is a supernatural spirit that has always existed.  

The universe is made of matter or energy.  As I've said many times, something does not create itself.  It had to come from somewhere.   The only explanation is that God created it.  God is not a part of the material universe.  He is separate from it.  God is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient.  But God is also a holy God and cannot do evil.  He is perfection.  The world is an imperfect place because of the fall of man.  His remedy for anyone is to believe in Jesus Christ as lord and savior.  That is the only remedy.   

According to YOU "^It just doesn't occur." You can't have it both ways. Sorry.

[blackbird]

43 minutes ago, robosmith said:

According to YOU "^It just doesn't occur." You can't have it both ways. Sorry.

You didn't explain.  What doesn't occur?  According to his word, the Bible, God is not a part of the material universe.   He is a spirit.  With God anything is possible.  He created the universe from nothing.  This is from the Bible, not me.   I am not speculating and there is no reason to doubt his word because it came from him.   You have to study it, preferably the King James Version 1611, to understand that.  

Edited October 3, 2022 by blackbird

[Aristides]

26 minutes ago, blackbird said:

You didn't explain.  What doesn't occur?  According to his word, the Bible, God is not a part of the material universe.   He is spirit.  With God anything is possible.  He created the universe from nothing.  This is from the Bible, not me.   I am not speculating and there is no reason to doubt his word because it came from him.   You have to study it, preferably the King James Version 1611, to understand that.  

He?

[robosmith]

29 minutes ago, blackbird said:

You didn't explain.  What doesn't occur?  According to his word, the Bible, God is not a part of the material universe.   He is spirit.  With God anything is possible.  He created the universe from nothing.  This is from the Bible, not me.   I am not speculating and there is no reason to doubt his word because it came from him.   You have to study it, preferably the King James Version 1611, to understand that.  

 

Quote

It just doesn't occur.  A vast amount of information is in cells.  Where could this information come from without an intelligent designer creator who put it there in the first place?

The "vast amount of information" in the "intelligent designer creator who put it there in the first place."

If you can posit magical "always there" entity, then the same can be said of the universe. It was "always there," and thus no need for an "intelligent designer creator who put it there in the first place."

You see how that works? If there is no cause for the intelligent designer creator effect, then there is no need for any other "causes." They were just "always there."

Of course that is ALL BS. You're just grasping at straws to justify the magic you believe in. 

Edited October 3, 2022 by robosmith

[WestCanMan]

2 hours ago, Hodad said:

Eh, I think trying to equate science to religion is a political statement more than anything born of reason. Nobody is killed or imprisoned by science for heterodoxy. They might be mocked, but that's about it. So yeah, significantly better. 

Not at all.

The push behind the vaccine mandates is both anti-science and completely unethical. 

The stats that matter, where the rubber meets the road, are out, and the "vaccines" are not vaccines at all. It's a gross misuse of the word vaccine. What do you call the polio vaccine now? A supervax?

88% of the covid deaths in the last few months in Canada were among the vaxed. And then there's the subject of side-effects among the young, healthy people who don't need them.

"Science" is a monster, at least in the field of medicine.

Quote

And while I don't find upside-down twerking particularly dignified, it might actually be the least of my worries when it comes to the behavior of legislators. 

"Not particularly dignified", hmmmm, that's a new way to put it.

IMO it's repugnant, and not at all the kind of thing that a person in a position of authority should do. The message to young girls is completely alarming.

It's one thing for a pop diva like Madonna to play the slut, but when legislators are doing it, who's left to set a good example? 

Quote

What I do know is that the decline of religious influence over American life is correlated significantly with an increase in justice, fairness and equitable treatment.

Not true at all.

America was conceived in a world where slavery had been normal since the very beginning of time, on every continent aside from Antarctica. 

America may still have been improving up until about 2015, but it wasn't moving at a snail's pace between independence and the 2010s. 

Quote

And there's a good case to be made that it's a causal relationship. 

There's a very good case to be made that the main reason society is collapsing is due to a decline in morality. 

"Don't lock him up, he was raised by a single mom" is a 'progressive' sentiment, and it's probably America's biggest problem right now. 

How did a guy beat up his baby momma and then run her over with a car, get locked up, and then use the same car to run over 50 people at a Christmas concert less than 2 months later? How was it called a "car cash" by the MSM, when it was the second instance where he used a car as a weapon in two months? 

[blackbird]

10 minutes ago, robosmith said:

 

The "vast amount of information" in the "intelligent designer creator who put it there in the first place.

If you can posit magical "always there" entity, then the same can be said of the universe. It was "always there," and thus no need for an "intelligent designer creator who put it there in the first place."

You see how that works? If there is no cause for the intelligent designer creator effect, then there is no need for any other "causes." They were just "always there."

Of course that is ALL BS. You're just grasping at straws to justify the magic you believe in. 

You forget, I pointed out science says the universe is expanding.  That points to a time when it began.  Since man has only been here for a finite amount of time, there had to have been a point when man first started living.  The only thing that makes sense is God created the material universe since something cannot create itself.  Magic is a kind of insulting word because it implies some kind trickery.  Supernatural events are not magic.  God is not a magician.  

I have already explained the complexity of the universe, the laws of physics, the existence of the atomic particles all point to an intelligent designer.   Where did the atomic particles and the laws of physics, gravity, etc. come from?

 

Edited October 3, 2022 by blackbird

[robosmith]

14 minutes ago, blackbird said:

You forget, I pointed out science says the universe is expanding.  That points to a time when it began.  Since man has only been here for a finite amount of time, there had to have been a point when man first started living.  The only thing that makes sense is God created the material universe since something cannot create itself.  Magic is a kind of insulting word because it implies some kind trickery.  Supernatural events are not magic.  God is not a magician.  

I have already explained the complexity of the universe, the laws of physics, the existence of the atomic particles all point to an intelligent designer.   Where did the atomic particles and the laws of physics, gravity, etc. come from?

 

It is JUST your ASSUMPTION that an expanding universe means it was created at a particular time.

It is entirely possible that it will reverse, and collapse into a big crunch.

"The only thing that makes sense" to YOU is NOT a valid reason to ASSUME that lends it greater validity than other scenarios.

Your very limited understanding suggests otherwise.

And yes, according to science, "supernatural" is equivalent to magic because there is no tracing effect to a cause within the laws of physics.

[blackbird]

9 minutes ago, robosmith said:

It is JUST your ASSUMPTION that an expanding universe means it was created at a particular time.

It is entirely possible that it will reverse, and collapse into a big crunch.

"The only thing that makes sense" to YOU is NOT a valid reason to ASSUME that lends it greater validity than other scenarios.

Your very limited understanding suggests otherwise.

And yes, according to science, "supernatural" is equivalent to magic because there is no tracing effect to a cause within the laws of physics.

You place man on the same level as God when you try to demote God and his supernatural work.   You also demote God in saying science is on the same level as God and the Bible.  It is not.  There are many atheists in science and the world.  They are no guide for eternal supernatural matters.

That is devilish.  God is not on the same level as man.  God is a supernatural being.  Man is a created being.  There is no comparison.  Your mind seems to be locked in some kind of narrow view where you cannot accept that an infinitely powerful being created everything including us who are subject to him as part of his creation.  I know it's tough to admit you are a mere mortal.  But you are and life is very short.  You will be held accountable for what you believe and the opportunities afforded you to change your thinking.  Learning and change is what is required.  How old are you or will to say?  You appear to be very young.

Edited October 4, 2022 by blackbird