Global Cooling Coming Soon?.....

[Seafever]

So Einstein says "God does not play dice with the Universe"...and then says that God does not exist........

That is ridiculous.

(BTW....It seems to be coming clear here that many of your scientific heroes including yourself are atheists?......I mean calling the Biblical disciple Luke "an ignorant desert dweller" is a bit of a stretch)

I note that you use the UK Guardian as a source for dsome of your rebuttals..


Since when was a semi-tabloid (Berliner format) left-leaning money-losing liberal newspaper a rocksolid source of scientific aggregate?

 

[Englishman]

So Einstein says "God does not play dice with the Universe"...and then says that God does not exist........

That is ridiculous.

Not ridiculous at all. Einstein did not believe in a personal god. He was a pantheist.
To quote from this article which you can read below-

“Einstein expressed his skepticism regarding an anthropomorphic deity, often describing it as "naïve" and "childlike". He stated, "It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Albert_Einstein

(BTW....It seems to be coming clear here that many of your scientific heroes including yourself are atheists?......I mean calling the Biblical disciple Luke "an ignorant desert dweller" is a bit of a stretch)

Of course he was ignorant. He did not know viruses and bacteria existed, he thought the world was the centre of the universe, he did not know anything about gravity or orbital mechanics, he did not know how lightening was formed, he knew nothing of evolution or the true origins of man and on and on it goes. A 7[SUP]th[/SUP] grader knows more science and how the world really works than any biblical character. Ergo they were totally ignorant.

I note that you use the UK Guardian as a source for dsome of your rebuttals..


Since when was a semi-tabloid (Berliner format) left-leaning money-losing liberal newspaper a rocksolid source of scientific aggregate?

So long as they can quote the origin and source of their scientific information and provide references to the actual papers or documentation, they are good to go as far as I’m concerned. I guess you don’t like them because they publish science related articles instead of political dogma and ideology rubbish?

 

[scott craven]

Are you guys bored ?

 

[Gunsmith]

Popcorn anybody?

 

[Seafever]

r.s.craven.....no.......

E/man..........see this is the thing.........For decades Albert E. and his mentor Max Planck were THE men in respect to their particular field. Classes in universities were taught for decades using AE's formulae as the last word and bottom line. No contest.

Then along comes The Hawk, who cleverly spanks Albert's butt.........writes " A Brief History Of Time" and the world is changed forever.

E=MC2 is no longer the unchallengeable equation it used to be............

BUt IT WAS FOR DECADES, WAS TAUGHT AND REGARDED AS "BULLETPROOF".

You may not get to ask an ancient Mayan much.........but you can actually ask the descendants, who have retained and passed down quite a bit of history to thier offspring over the ages......and the ones that have been asked say it wasn't their doing, they got it from the "Gods" (whoever the Gods were...)

Many cultures and tribes of note also say the same thing today. And it is completely normal for a Shaman or other religious leader to take a drug,go into a trance and "receive information" from the spirit world or Gods.

 

[Seafever]

Forget trying to date rocks with radiocarbon methodology....

Isochron testing is much better...oops...no it isn't

http://www.tccsa.tc/articles/isochrons2.html

 

[Seafever]

Then there's this:-

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesta...-blow-gaping-hold-in-global-warming-alarmism/

 

[Seafever]

Am I a 6day creationist? no
Am I an atheist? No

I'm like Joe Rogan ...I question everything....

I don't believe in evolution theory......because it has more holes in it than Swiss cheese

I'm also not sure about God..........it seems weird that God is always referred to as male and The Father Figure......but he's a single parent with one son....and no wife.

Women don't factor anywhere in the story...except for Eve...who gets all the blame for screwing up by eating the apple.

Actually in Christ's time there were female priests (Rabbi's) galore.....but for some reason the Bible carefully edits out that fact and makes it seem like men ran the show all the time.

 

[Englishman]

Then there's this:-

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesta...-blow-gaping-hold-in-global-warming-alarmism/

Oh for Petes sake it is a Forbes article which is a haven for climate change deniers. Anyone can see that Forbes article is spin because it uses the term "alarmists" a dozen or more times.

The whole ridiculous so-called science behind what Forbes has published is debunked here.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/20...-in-nasa-data-paper-by-ideologue-roy-spencer/

And here:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/07/misdiagnosis-of-surface-temperature-feedback/


http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/b...hole-in-global-warming-alarmism/#.UkJ41T8vxzM

 

[Englishman]

r.s.craven.....no.......

E/man..........see this is the thing.........For decades Albert E. and his mentor Max Planck were THE men in respect to their particular field. Classes in universities were taught for decades using AE's formulae as the last word and bottom line. No contest.

Then along comes The Hawk, who cleverly spanks Albert's butt.........writes " A Brief History Of Time" and the world is changed forever.

E=MC2 is no longer the unchallengeable equation it used to be............

BUt IT WAS FOR DECADES, WAS TAUGHT AND REGARDED AS "BULLETPROOF".

You are perpetrating false information again. Hawking is a brilliant man and has given us new insight into the physics of the universe and the forces governing the Big Bang and the subsequent expansion. Nowhere does he ever “disprove” or make invalid the equation E=MC2.

I challenge you to locate a scientific paper where E=MC2 is proven invalid. And wikipeadia still has a huge article on the equation so I don’t think it is obsolete yet!! (And never will be)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass–energy_equivalence

You may not get to ask an ancient Mayan much.........but you can actually ask the descendants, who have retained and passed down quite a bit of history to thier offspring over the ages......and the ones that have been asked say it wasn't their doing, they got it from the "Gods" (whoever the Gods were...)

So the fact that descendents have passed down stories supposedly from their Mayan ancestors that they got their information from god makes it true!? Totally unscientific, since no data and no evidence for that story. This is mythology pure and simple and no more true than the great flood or the garden of eden.

Many cultures and tribes of note also say the same thing today. And it is completely normal for a Shaman or other religious leader to take a drug,go into a trance and "receive information" from the spirit world or Gods.

I don’t know about you but if anyone I knew took drugs, went into a trance, and then came out of it raving and said they had had revelations and visions, I would walk rapidly in the other direction in case they did something even weirder!

No doubt the ignorant peoples of the past steeped in mythology, superstition, and fear based on ignorance, did believe what their “shamans” said about the information they “received”. They were in thrall and frightened and often these “shamans” could order their deaths (and indeed did so right up to the Middle Ages in Europe and still do in other parts of the world) so what is a poor regular tribe member to do? But whatever mumbo-jumbo these shamans came up with it certainly was not from the spirit world (because there isn’t any) and it sure as hell was not factual science and I still cannot believe you think that it was.

 

[Englishman]

Forget trying to date rocks with radiocarbon methodology....

Isochron testing is much better...oops...no it isn't

http://www.tccsa.tc/articles/isochrons2.html

Seafever this article is from another silly creationist site. There are several articles out there with similar themes from sites like Genesisanswers and Bible-against-evolution or whatever. They are all refuted and exposed in time and this one will be too. (there are earlier examples where the scientific community has exposed their shortcomings.)
These creationists are so desperate to refute the known age of the earth, that they keep bringing out articles attacking the scientific methods and trying to sow doubt and distrust. With you they obviously succeed!
The key point is they never bring out any scientific papers with tests. measurements, results and conclusions that prove the earth is “young” as they keep insisting. All they can do is attack the current science and provide false or misleading accusations against it.

 

[Englishman]

Am I a 6day creationist? no
Am I an atheist? No

I'm like Joe Rogan ...I question everything....

If you question absolutely everything (even if it has mountains of evidence gathered by thousands of scientists) and believe anything might be possible then I guess you believe in fairies, ghosts, lepracauns, dragons, that the earth is flat and not round (the scientists might be wrong!), and the flying spaghetti monster – especially if an ancient ignorant person wrote it in a book or saw it in a drug induced vision!
(P.S. if you make a point of not looking for answers and refusing to acknowledge the existence of evidence it makes it very easy to “question everything”. Someone ignorant of maths will question if 2+2 =4)

I don't believe in evolution theory......because it has more holes in it than Swiss cheese

You are utterly and completely wrong again.
If you will not believe in the mountains of evidence and thousand of papers produced by hundreds of scientists working in dozens of fields then I feel very sorry for you. It is totally preposterous for you to ignore all that evidence but if you insist on shutting your eyes to it all there is no point in going further. One cannot have a rational discussion with anyone who refuses to acknowledge the existence of evidence.

I'm also not sure about God..........it seems weird that God is always referred to as male and The Father Figure......but he's a single parent with one son....and no wife.

Women don't factor anywhere in the story...except for Eve...who gets all the blame for screwing up by eating the apple.

Actually in Christ's time there were female priests (Rabbi's) galore.....but for some reason the Bible carefully edits out that fact and makes it seem like men ran the show all the time.

Stories; just mythological stories……..

 

[Gunsmith]

Umm, you forgot the Unicorn.

 

[seascene]

To Englishman: Thanks for your posts. Confronting ignorance can as yet be fatal in some places on this earth. Instead of re-active ridicule you have been patient and well intentioned.

To SeaFever: In that same spirit of assistance with great questions of the time, I would suggest a very helpful website that does provide unbiased information that both contradicts and in some cases acknowledges some of your concerns. The site may be found here: http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

 

[Seafever]

E/Man.......while it is true that many a scientist ( and also "ordinary people" as defined by you)has made a good contribution to the "progress" of man, we come to the subject of "alarmism".

"Alarmism" is used by scientists, governmental agencies, religious groups, newspapers, "experts",the military, and who knows who else every single day to further agendas.

Thanks to todays technology and the ability to reach the masses it's easier than ever to get away with.

As in the case of Iraq 1, where we had a top ranking general with a picture of hundreds of tanks lined up at the Iraq border to invade Saudi Arabia.

This picture was proved to be a complete fake, but was shopped to the masses as fact.

Much of the "alarmism" elsehwere stems from "evidence" that is then crunched on a computer to render "projections".

Once a "projection" has been generated , it is used as "future fact".

The Word Health Org (for one) does this all the time.

It is being done all the time every day by just about anybody that wants to achieve a desired result with the general public.

Where does the truth lie on any given day?

Maybe in the middle.....maybe the far end...maybe the near end.....or maybe nowhere.......


"Overwhelming empirical evidence" is a term used by agenda seekers everywhere.......(as in the Iraq 1 tank picture for example).

Harper's government currently allegedly does the same thing..........cherry picks the scientific info for presentation and puts a spin on it for mass consumption.

Even in a "democracy" the information is doctored. If you live in a communist country, banana republic or country run by a militant factor, all or any of the information released about anything could be erroneous.

I'm not saying all climatre change info is faked.

But I am saying if you think no-one has an agenda in this and that everything is sweetness and light....then I beleive you to be more naive than you think I am.

 

[Seafever]

BTW...in answer to your question "how long does it take to paint a Mona Lisa?"

If it were you or me.....maybe years......

However in the hands of an expert:- not all that long.

DaVinci did thousands of works in his career......and because he was very good at what he did plus his natural talent it would come to him a lot quicker than other people.

Some masterworks of music were written in hours or less.

Many many examples of an artist, when asked about the work, saying:- "Just came to me........I woke up and wrote the whole thing down, just streamed from me, didn't even have to think about it".

This has happened in all areas of the arts periodically.

 

[Gunsmith]

I am taking this on the humorous side but I am also learning much from this well tempered argument. Keep up the good work.

 

[Seafever]

Hawking speaks:- but not pro-Einstein....and seems to contradict himself on the subject of "God"....as he has stated that belief in God is a silly idea then goes on to say "that information is known to God but hidden from us"

http://dailyrevolution.org/allgood/010119.html

 

[Seafever]

On Darwin (if you read it for information purposes only)...a view shared by many that challenge Darwin's version of events.


http://www.vedicsciences.net/articles/darwin-debunked.html

 

[SophiaB]

No one benefits from proven global warming is a sham. If people drive less, produce less emissions, recycle more etc because they believe it contributes to global warming. That is a good things