Guess who just won the Nobel Peace Prize?

[jamesdmanley]

Originally Posted by HarryT

But I believe that a large proportion of Americans, influenced by religious beliefs, do not accept the theory of evolution as being valid, despite the weight of a staggering amount of hard science supporting it.

wow what liberal media outlet told you that? bbc? lol

[HarryT]

The existance of such abominations as the Creation Museum unfortunately make it all too plain to the entire world that this is the case.

That, plus evidence such as these Gullup Poll Results.

The BBC is not a supporter of the Liberal Party. It is entirely apolitical, under the terms of the Royal Charter under which it operates. It has an independent board, one of whose duties is to guarantee this independence.

[NatCh]

I think we've got enough to kick around here without digging up the Origin of Man debate too! At least start a different thread.

Originally Posted by rjnagle

We have to understand the role that scientists should play in a political debate. Yes, their opinions weigh more, but we should not cede too much authority to their pronouncements simply because they have a Phd (my debate coach said that it's easy to find a fool with a PhD who was willing say any damn thing you please).

Ha! I've known way too many PhDs to fall into that particular trap -- ideally it's better to actually know them so that you can tell which ones are overeducated nut-jobs who think their degrees are justification to stop thinking, so that you can salt their opinions appropriately.

Originally Posted by HarryT

There are a number of advanced designs of nuclear reactor which are more efficient, less complex, and inherently much safer than current generation plants, most notably the Pebble Bed Reactor design.

I've been interested in PBRs for some time. But I'll remind everyone that while nuclear power has its advantages, it has some weaknesses too -- I seem to recall a large number of French Citizens dying a couple-few years ago because there wasn't enough power for AC, because the nuclear power-plants had to be shut down, because they couldn't cool them properly without literally boiling rivers.

That's a lot of becauses.

I also want to say that I think I'm learning a few things from this discussion and appreciate the info provided by several. I also appreciate the way the discussion is staying so civil -- but I always appreciate that!

[Huyggy]

Originally Posted by NatCh

-- I seem to recall a large number of French Citizens dying a couple-few years ago because there wasn't enough power for AC, because the nuclear power-plants had to be shut down, because they couldn't cool them properly without literally boiling rivers.

Where did it happen ? (excuse me for the question but I didn't know that )

[NatCh]

Other than France, I'm not real sure ... I believe it was in the more rural areas.

[NatCh]

There's a reference to it here, but it's not really a report on it -- I'm inferring that it was summer of '03.

[yvanleterrible]

Economists prefer Oil, Gas and Charcoal, and scientists prefer Nuclear and future Fusion. I, as all plant life , prefer the Sun and its derivatives; Wind, Wave and Hydro.
Geothermal seems clean but some offsets bother me.

If you consume from a mixed bag, there are less drawbacks, less dramatic consequences.
Oh brother! I could go on for hours!

[HarryT]

Good though solar and wind power are, it's not always sunny nor windy, so they're no good for your "base load" power generation. Wave and geothermal are reliable, but there are relatively few places in the world suitable for them. That realistically leaves nuclear as pretty much the only "non Greenhouse gas" source for your base load generation capability.

[jamesdmanley]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The existance of such abominations as the Creation Museum unfortunately make it all too plain to the entire world that this is the case.

That, plus evidence such as these Gullup Poll Results.

The BBC is not a supporter of the Liberal Party. It is entirely apolitical, under the terms of the Royal Charter under which it operates. It has an independent board, one of whose duties is to guarantee this independence.

i could care less about ONE museum in a country of thousands and the poll you quoted is decieving

"It is important to note that this question included a specific reference to "thinking about how human beings came to exist on Earth . . ." that oriented the respondents toward an explicit consideration of the implication of evolution for man's origin."

your opinion on americans is grossly bigoted. i guess because youre from the uk you have bad teeth?

[Huyggy]

Originally Posted by NatCh

There's a reference to it here, but it's not really a report on it -- I'm inferring that it was summer of '03.

Oh well, I remember this summer : very hot indeed (it was just during my final exams : Great ).
In fact, people died during this summer because of the unexpectedness of the heat, and not really due to the lack of AC: in Spain or Italy, where the heat was worse, there wasn't this problem.... And AC isn't very popular in these countries!

I think with the global warming we must all learn to live with it (and avoid AC which increases the energy requirements).

[jamesdmanley]

Originally Posted by Huyggy

Oh well, I remember this summer : very hot indeed (it was just during my final exams : Great ).
In fact, people died during this summer because of the unexpectedness of the heat, and not really due to the lack of AC: in Spain or Italy, where the heat was worse, there wasn't this problem.... And AC isn't very popular in these countries!

I think with the global warming we must all learn to live with it (and avoid AC which increases the energy requirements).

and 2 global warming counsels were canceled in dc this past winter because of blizzards

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by HarryT

This is absolutely excellent news. Climate change is one of the biggest risks facing the future of our planet. You might want to stop laughing for a while and check out the facts, Nate. Much as it may displease Mr Bush, one cannot pretend that global warming will just go away if you ignore it.

The truth is, no one is quite sure what is going on. Climate is constantly changing; some climatologists believe that we are on the verge of a global ice age, not global warming. The facts are, no one is sure what the facts are. Was a "normal" climate what existed 12,000 years ago, when the earth was in a much cooler phase? When it warmed up, worldwide sea levels rose up to 100 meters. This is definitely much worse a "climactic disaster" than the global warming people are warning us about....

[Huyggy]

Originally Posted by jamesdmanley

and 2 global warming counsels were canceled in dc this past winter because of blizzards

Well, maybe it's this:



but no kidding, global warming was detected on several years I think, not during one season. but can't discuss more about it because I'm really not an expert of that !

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by mores

maybe i am just too intelligent for this planet, but the reason why i like gore's film is because it makes one think a bit about our planet and what man has done to it.

sure, the movie uses effects, does mislead, does exaggerate, but it is supposed to be both entertaining and provocative at the same time.

So, a man has been awarded the Nobel Prize for what is essentially a pure propaganda piece. Yes, I have nothing but awe and respect for the Nobel Prize now.......

[wgrimm]

Originally Posted by emkay

Yes, the climate has always been changing on Earth. But the rate of change since industrialisation is completely anomolous in comparison to previous fluctuations. A *massive* majority of *credible* climate scientists (i.e. those publishing their findings in peer-reviewed journals) believe that this change is due to human activity.

That's simply not the case. Between 12,000 and 10,000 BC, the earth went through a major "thaw." Sea levels worldwide increased up to 100 meters. Now, this change was much greater than anything that we have seen since industrialization. The eruption of the volcano Krakatoa accounted for short-term changes greater than anything seen caused by industrialization. The factors that account for climate are many and have never been accurately modeled. The climatologists can't even accurately model short-term weather; their best models are accurate out to three days or so.