mark francis
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2021
- Messages
- 27,699
The world-famous Christian philosopher and scientist Sir Isaac Newton studied the effects of gravity and gave the world new insights into the miraculous force created by God.
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
we are in a ice age
- Thread starter the annoying thing
- Start date
Werbung:
the annoying thing
Well-Known Member
Science is basically the study of theroys some based on actual trails and tribulations .And much based on theory.
They change all the time. As a matter of fact I think there were 5 major theory's on how the universe was created and now the James Webb telescope changes all of them for the most part except Creation.
Starcastle
Well-Known Member
White people and capitalism are ruining the earth.
How dare you!
the annoying thing
Well-Known Member
She is annoying as annoying can be.All she needs is 8 billion people to totally change thier life style and development of technology we do not have yet that's really efficient but we are getting there. And to pull trillions of dollars out of our rear ends to pay for it and I mean trillions upon trillions and all the natural resources to built it world wide .
Hey some body is paying for her up keep and expenses
the annoying thing
Well-Known Member
From what I understand they claim we are at the end of one possibility already in a warming period.
LittleGreenMan
Well-Known Member
Only one teeny weeny problem: Can we fit all 8 billion into our existing caves, or do we need to start mining on a really grand scale? Here's an interesting engineering question: How many Kennecott-size holes do we have to make to hold everyone?
Well it convinced a handful
But more were on the side of warming
Picking the since discredited minority view is something a science ***** like you would do
The irony coming from a stolen election ***** lol
You are the ***** not understanding how science works everyday
the annoying thing
Well-Known Member
Just put hits out on about 7 to 7.5 billion
mark francis
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2021
- Messages
- 27,699
Scientific truth is not established on the basis of majority mob opinion. The overwhelming majority mob of geologists mocked J. Harlen Bretz to scorn for suggesting the Channeled Scablands, like the Grand Canyon, was formed by major flooding and not by millions of years of slow river erosion.
J Harlen Bretz - Wikipedia
Bretz encountered resistance to his theories from the geology establishment of the day. The geology establishment was resistant to such a sweeping theory for the origin of a broad landscape for a variety of reasons, including lack of familiarity with the remote areas of the interior Pacific Northwest where the research was based, and the lack of status and reputation of Bretz in the eyes of the largely Ivy League-based geology elites. Furthermore, his theory implied the potential possibilities of a Biblical flood, which the scientific community strongly rejected.[9] The Geological Society of Washington invited the young Bretz to present his previously published research at a meeting on 12 January 1927, where several other geologists presented competing theories. Bretz saw this as an ambush, and referred to the group as six "challenging elders". Their intention was to defeat him in a public debate, and thereby end the challenge his theories posed to their conservative interpretation of uniformitarianism. ...
By the time the Geological Society of America finally recognized Bretz’s work with the Penrose Medal, the field’s highest honour, it was 1979 and Bretz was 96 years old. He joked to his son, "All my enemies are dead, so I have no one to gloat over."[12]
mark francis
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2021
- Messages
- 27,699
Has science taught you why similarity of DNA between humans and apes supposedly justifies assumptions of blood relatedness but similarities of DNA between rats and humans does not demand the same assumptions of relatedness?
Scientific truth is not established on the basis of majority mob opinion. The overwhelming majority mob of geologists mocked J. Harlen Bretz to scorn for suggesting the Channeled Scablands, like the Grand Canyon, was formed by major flooding and not by millions of years of slow river erosion.
J Harlen Bretz - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Bretz encountered resistance to his theories from the geology establishment of the day. The geology establishment was resistant to such a sweeping theory for the origin of a broad landscape for a variety of reasons, including lack of familiarity with the remote areas of the interior Pacific Northwest where the research was based, and the lack of status and reputation of Bretz in the eyes of the largely Ivy League-based geology elites. Furthermore, his theory implied the potential possibilities of a Biblical flood, which the scientific community strongly rejected.[9] The Geological Society of Washington invited the young Bretz to present his previously published research at a meeting on 12 January 1927, where several other geologists presented competing theories. Bretz saw this as an ambush, and referred to the group as six "challenging elders". Their intention was to defeat him in a public debate, and thereby end the challenge his theories posed to their conservative interpretation of uniformitarianism. ...
By the time the Geological Society of America finally recognized Bretz’s work with the Penrose Medal, the field’s highest honour, it was 1979 and Bretz was 96 years old. He joked to his son, "All my enemies are dead, so I have no one to gloat over."[12]
i didn't say it was a majority opinion so you should believe it just because it was, i was saying how stupid you were for picking a minority one that has since been discredited.
but you are a science *****, so there's that
feel free to post something that tries to make a point. random posts about rat dna is stupid.
Werbung:
We share a large amount of our DNA in common with all mammals through our shared evolutionary past. But I think you have confused two different ideas. Sharing 99% of genes is not the same as sharing 99% of DNA. While we may have nearly the same number and type of genes (i.e. rat genes have counterparts in the human genome) it does not mean that these genes are completely identical. They are comparing the number and function of the genes only.They are NOT comparing the actual DNA sequences.
