(March 7, 2019 at 6:42 pm)Jehanne Wrote:(March 7, 2019 at 5:23 pm)Drich Wrote: what a simpleton.. Do I need to explain to you how reference material works??? When I quote another or leave their work or alink to their work it is not my education nor ablity that is in question. My role in this is but to sum up and present the work of other 'smarter men' in such a way that you all can not only understand it but phrase and produce it in such away as to illicit a response.. In a sense I am but a conduit putting a person before often times indisputable fact. now if you question the fact or youwant to argue the facts then you address the person who I have often time quoted.
Your views are NOT the views of modern scholarship.
Again NOT MY VIEWS RETARD! They represent a different section of MODERN SCHOLARSHIP. or are you so stupid to not understand 'science' is not in 100% agreement with it self? There are multiple theories on everything with as much sometimes more research behind it. for instance global warming is a late 80s sky is falling problem who was coined originally when nixon was president. Before that? 500 years of weather research that pointed to solar output along with orbital displacement (our relative position to the sun based on the fact we do not have a semitrical trajetory around the sun. we orbit more like a hula hoop around the sun and less like a bike wheel on an centralized axel. meaning when our orbit put us closer to the sun and when and if the sun is max output (as sun energy cycles) our planet warms and cools. Again! 500 years of this type of theory, and we get 20 years of the sky is falling unless we tax the countries and their people who have factories and cars! Next thing you know you all are bending over to pay you carbon tax.
Understand the point is not what you believe or which version you even like, the point is science is not always with in 100% agreement with it self, and what I do is bring up the counter point to popular BS like the sky is falling global warming and show you it take faith to believe in a 30 year history of the sky is falling verse 500 years of recorded data. Again don't make this about what or why you believe, but understand the point that you ultimatly choose by faith that your scientists with 30 years of work are right and 500 years of collected data is wrong. it is the faith in choosing that I bring to the surface not who is right and who is wrong.
You people are so use to being polarized you can not even discuss a subject beyond the who is right and who is wrong as being the only means of discussion.. If you had the mind you could step the conversation up a knotch and look at the point I am making. In that I don't care what you believe but the choice you made even if you where unaware of the other theories at the time. If I can make you aware of other theories and you remain it is because of the faith you have in your specific brand of science. that said that little bit of faith you have before your brand of science floods you with everything you need to convert that faith to absolute belief is the same measure of faith God requires to do for you what he has done for me.
