Our Oceans are Under Attack

it's oppressive and inflationary. and won't reduce CO2.
If you are serious about reducing CO2, you'll have to shut a bunch of things down. Maybe not cities. Industry? Airports? Ships?

 

Ok, so you are telling me that your religious position, that God created species rather than letting them evolve, is not for religious reasons.

This is good.

Ok, so without bringing religion into it at all, explain how critters got here if they didn't evolve.

You're going to have to mention religion, aren't you? But nothing about this is for religious reasons? Right.

I don't like scams or pseudo-science either, but evolution doesn't fall into those categories. The question is not: how do you get evolution? The question is: how do you stop it? If you have reproduction with variation, and you do, then it's almost impossible for evolution not to occur. I really do not see how you can have variation in genomes and expect total stability over time. Obviously they are going to change.

It's no good bringing up "baraminology" either, because that has no basis that anyone has ever been able to determine. It's pure post hoc hand-waving. Ring species blow it out of the water.

Anyway, once you get into it evolution is so much richer and more fascinating and more satisfying than the creationist view, which frankly has always struck me as remarkably impoverished. The former just makes so much sense when you start tying all the evidence together. The latter has to spend most of its energy trying to jump through impossibly situated hoops, and failing.

 

You keep saying it's oppressive but never provide any reason why it would be. I thought you were in favour of innovation. The whole point of a carbon tax is to encourage innovation.

And you don't have to shut things down. You just have to adapt how you do them.

 

Really? The only thing the Australian carbon tax encouraged was rent-seeking by wind farm proponents and shutting down energy intensive activities like aluminium refineries.

PDW

 

Sorry to hear about your wife yob. Hope she recovers quickly.

 

Cleaning Up The Chesapeake Bay Would Bring $130 Billion In Annual Economic Benefits | Think Progress

 

Clean Coal?

Interesting report last night on MSNBC

http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/has-an-era-of-clean-coal-begun-339262531968

 

I'll just touch on the topic briefly so you understand, in my mind, there is consistency.
Don't ask me to defend these statements, which is tantamount to asking me to convince you. The labors of Hercules would be easier I suspect.
IF God wanted to use evolution as means of creation, fine with me.
I have no problem with the theory of evolution, as a historical science curiosity, though I see contrary evidence to evolution in the fossil record.
Variation within species does occur.
It wouldn't matter to me, if evolutionists found solace in studying belly button lint if they remained harmless.
IE: Don't confuse navel science with naval science.
But existence of God is not fine with evolutionists.
Evolutionists insist all the sciences, all politics, all philosophy, match their worldview. That is an ideological stance.
My problem is with the ideological evolutionists.
They and ideological AGWers use same tactics and both demand exclusivity and dominance in everybodies thoughts.
Both claim their science is settled.
Evolutionists and AGWers are alike.
Everything is to be interpreted as seen through their lens.
I peeked through those lenses and don't like those distorted views of the world.
I resist.

 

Thanks

 

Top-scientist-resigns-from-post-admits-Global-Warming-is-a-scam

for your reading pleasure.

http://www.sott.net/article/277349-Top-scientist-resigns-from-post-admits-Global-Warming-is-a-scam

 

Further pleasant reading:

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2...limate-complaints/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201011/memberresigns.cfm

http://www.aps.org/about/pressreleases/haroldlewis.cfm

 

Well I'm not surprised it encouraged wind farms, since part of its intent was to encourage investment in means of producing power without simultaneously producing CO2. So as far as that goes, it seems to have done more or less what it was meant to.

It also wasn't in effect long, so things didn't have much chance to get rolling before it was canned again. Innovation doesn't always happen overnight.

Personally I'm not aware of any aluminium refineries that shut down as a direct result of the carbon tax. I don't recall any companies making such a statement. Power costs have risen, yes, but the vast majority of the price rise was driven by other factors, and prices are still going up.

Australian labour is also highly priced compare to some other countries, which is a large part of why our manufacturing is going down the tubes. Companies that can afford to move operations overseas often take that option because of the potential for greater profits via reduced wages bills. However, this is getting into Oz politics, which is a bit off-topic.

 

Ok mate, I have to stop you there.

The Vatican are "evolutionists". You know, the guys that used to run the Inquisition. That Vatican. They agree that evolution is a fact. They are also rather staunch on the whole existence of God thing, in case you hadn't noticed.

The same can be said of the Anglicans, who are the official Church of England. They like God too, but have no problem with evolution. That makes them "evolutionists" too.

These are just two obvious, but rather major, examples.

I have no idea where you are getting this from. It certainly doesn't match any reality that I've encountered.

 

Yeah that site is totally legit.

Are you serious?

A good summary of the site's owner: Laura Knight Jadczyk

Great source there, Petros.

 

Are these global warming science scammers the same people who faked the Apollo moon program ? Can't trust anyone !