Search results

For the RCC along with many mainline Protestant denominations the age of the earth is not a moral or faith issue. In other words their adherent are free to accept or deny the science.

I hope your rationalizations help you sleep better.

Yes everything can be argued and the the fossil fuels industries are masters at feeding the gullible public misinformation and blatant lies especially when when so many politicians from all parties are dependent on their generous political donations. Of course you think that an additional 1.5 C...

Yes the highest temp for for Death Valley was 134 F on july 10, 1913. What you conveniently overlooked is that July 4, 2023 was the hottest day on record globally. But wait: it's much worse...

I used to believe some extremely strange things. For example: I believed that for the most part those who were brought up in the US would understand that everything has a cause such as climate change and that we could do something in time to at least not make it so bad in the future. Real stupid...

As I said many time everyone is entitled to believe whatever they want to believe. I looked it up and found that it is not considered a matter of faith for Catholics and most mainline protestants so it is not against their faith to believe either way, but that would be not be a discussion for...

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/The-Grid-Needs-A-20-Trillion-Upgrade-To-Support-Energy-Transition.html Back in 2020, BloombergNEF estimated the cost of a grid overhaul at $14 trillion over the thirty years between 2020 and 2050. In 2023, the cost to upgrade the grid has risen to $21...

Blessed are those who have good air conditioners, a stable power grid.

I am not an atheist but even a non-atheist knows that anyone connecting atheist with science or labeling science as fake don't know what they are talking about. If the "rational intelligence" you are referring to was not the proximate cause of the universe, etc but the ultimate cause. If he...

If you read his comments you would might realize that he is quite knowledgeable about science. That may very well be but you don't need to be a scientist to know that Meyers' book about an hypothesis does not contain a testable hypothesis. If you haven't bought the book you could spend the...

He most certainly does exist. Puck (not his real name) is an attorney. You can personally interact with him at the Peaceful Science forum where he frequently comments. If you want to know more about him but don't care to interact with him, you can check out his comments there. My guess is that...

The "Return-God-Hypothesis-Scientific-Discoveries" makes no testable hypothesis. Here is a review of the book by Puck Mendelssohn. "...the book which announces in its title the "return of the God hypothesis" ends without a single hypothesis in its grasp. What Meyer ends with is at best a loose...

There are tons of misinformation from both sides which is exactly what is expected. Even so, the reality is that the climate change models have underestimated the problem. We are past the time when we can prevent it. My warning stands: Climate change catastrophe is heading your way. There is no...

The U.S. has sustained 363 weather and climate disasters since 1980 where overall damages/costs reached or exceeded $1 billion (including CPI adjustment to 2023). The total cost of these 363 events exceeds $2.590 trillion. Alert: Climate change catastrophe heading your way. There is no escape...

Isn't it amazing how the right wing pawns are self-victimized beyond belief? https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/beyond%20belief

You are starting from a belief that evolution is in crisis and a belief in ID. I'll rephrase what I said. That something appears designed or belief in intelligent design is not a valid scientific argument against evolution or that evolution is in crisis. Another way to put it: the claim that...

Your analogy misses the mark. W/o nails a hammer's likely main function would be to destroy things. The main function of science is the study of natural laws to increase our understanding of the natural world. One is destructive while the other is constructive.

You are starting with the premise is that what you believe looks designed MUST BE designed which is not a argument for science to reject design by unintelligent causes like natural laws. Now you may ask "why should science takes precedence?" The simple answer is that science and the supernatural...

And done with a 360 million year old fossils