elevated_u2_fan
Blue Crack Supplier
who needs "scientists" telling them what to do with their "facts" and "logic" and "answers"?
California to go 50% renewable by 20130.
Except, in this case, the mechanics have ignored the fact that the car doesn't have an engine anyway. Soil erosion and deforestation outpace carbon pollution, and they additionally hurt the planet's ability to capture carbon and regulate climate.
I hope our grandkids won't be saying "why did you talk about carbon emissions so much while annually exporting (almost irreplaceable) topsoil by the tonnage?"
How do you, as a non-scientist (I assume -- maybe you're a professor of climatology or geology), "disagree" with established, researched science? On what basis do you form your disagreement? What research have you done that enables you to "disagree"? What is the "other side of the spectrum" of science? How can there be another "side"?
Sent from
It's a committee, he only has one vote
At least he will be there to hear a few scientists put forth their views
A lot of NASA money runs through red states, I expect it to keep flowing
As a Christian, I don't agree with many of the scientific opinions
what an infuriating statement.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
As a Christian, I don't agree with many of the scientific opinions
I hope you realize that just because you don't agree with it, it doesn't mean it's not true.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Within your branch of biology is medicine
Do you disagree with majority opinions in medicine?
There was a time religion and medicine were at odds
Religion and science was at odds over the solar system until fairly recent times
Most religion is not at odds over evolution or age of earth anymore
It seems the only some want to hold onto is Adam being the first man?
I don't agree with a lot of it because it's just flat out wrong.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
I'd be curious what science you believe to be flat out wrong?
You seem to be contradicting yourself; you refer to science as opinion, say some of it's flat out wrong, you state because you're "Christian" is why you don't agree, and then say the church used to be anti-science. It sounds to me that your church still is very anti-science.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
I'm not anti-science. Do you have any kind of reading comprehension? I don't agree with many scientific theories, doesn't make me anti-science. I'm a lot more pro-science than most religious people.
And I'm not gonna waste my time arguing scientific theories on a U2 forum. Seems really pointless and I don't have enough time to waste to do that.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
If you're going to come into FYM, and make some of the comments you do then you're going to have to learn how to debate like a big boy. So far, you haven't shown you're capable.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
You're not worth my time
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
I don't agree with a lot of it because it's just flat out wrong.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
I'm not anti-science. Do you have any kind of reading comprehension? I don't agree with many scientific theories, doesn't make me anti-science. I'm a lot more pro-science than most religious people.
And I'm not gonna waste my time arguing scientific theories on a U2 forum. Seems really pointless and I don't have enough time to waste to do that.
Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
Whether you're religious or not, it's still a faith in what you believe. Whether that is creationism or the Big Bang.
My biggest issue with science, though, is accountability with research. It's a very complicated field and therefore the "elites" of the science world can manipulate just about any commoner. But the same can be said of a variety of topics.