NPR lists this as a climate sin.
I spend a lot of time visiting family which requires me to fly
Science Friday’s Climate Confessions by Scifri on SoundCloud – Hear the world’s sounds
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
Recent Comments
- arn on The Clock Is Ticking
- Mike Peinsipp on The Clock Is Ticking
- arn on The Clock Is Ticking
- dm on “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- D. Boss on The Clock Is Ticking
- William on The Clock Is Ticking
- arn on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- arn on The Clock Is Ticking
- Gordon Vigurs on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- Disillusioned on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
Pseudo-science and pseudo-religion are natural allies of tyrants.
FEAR of these arrogant fools is a lack of faith in the common conclusions of genuine theology and science on the Creator & Sustainer of the World:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Solar_Energy_For_Review.pdf
The Creator and Sustainer of every atom and life in the world designed us all to be happy, joyous and free.
The current crop of world leaders
1. Did their duty to humanity in reducing racism and nationalism, but
2. Did a disservice to humanity in reducing the integrity of science and constitutional limits on government.
About the time when fire was “tamed,” the Shaman took over the clan.
Yes but is the church talking about not believing in Post Modern Climate Psyence™ or not believing in classical science.
The church is as anti-(real)-science today as it was in the time of Galileo.
There was pseudo-scientific evidence Earth was the center of the cosmos then, just as there is pseudo-scientific evidence for AGW today.
Sad indeed when Bill Nye, Al Gore and the Pope are identified as believers in science.
They are just Stalin’s little helpers in promoting pseudo-science as real science.
“The relationship between the Roman Catholic Church and science is a widely debated subject. The church has been called “probably the largest single and longest-term patron of science in history.”[1] It has founded schools and universities and conducted medical and other scientific research over many centuries. Catholic scientists, both clergymen and religious sisters as well as lay people, have led scientific discovery in many fields. In his 1996 encyclical Fides et Ratio Pope John Paul II wrote that “Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth.” Conversely, the conflict thesis, was developed in the United States in the 19th century and retains some pop-culture currency. It proposed an intrinsic intellectual conflict between the Church and science.
Even before the development of modern scientific method, Catholic theology did not insist on a literal interpretation of biblical text that might, as St Augustine wrote in the 5th century, contradict what can be established by science or reason, thus Catholicism has been able to reinterpret scripture in light of scientific discovery.
The Catholic contribution to the development of the sciences has been formidable. From ancient times, Christian emphasis on practical charity gave rise to the development of systematic nursing and hospitals and the Church remains the single greatest private provider of medical care and research facilities in the world. Following the Fall of Rome, monasteries and convents remained the last bastions of scholarship in Western Europe. During the Middle Ages, the Church founded a well integrated international network of Cathedral schools and Europe’s first universities, producing a fine array of scholars like Robert Grosseteste, Albert the Great, Roger Bacon and Thomas Aquinas who helped establish scientific method. During this period, the Church was also a great patron of engineering for the construction of elaborate cathedral architecture.
Since the Renaissance, Catholic scientists (many of them clergymen) have been credited as fathers of a diverse range of scientific fields – including physics (Galileo), acoustics (Mersenne), mineralogy (Agricola), modern chemistry (Lavoisier), modern anatomy (Vesalius), stratigraphy (Steno), bacteriology (Kircher and Pasteur), genetics (Mendel), analytical geometry (Descartes), heliocentric cosmology (Copernicus) atomic theory (Boškovi?) and the Big Bang Theory on the origins of the universe (Lemaître). Jesuits devised modern lunar nomenclature and stellar classification and some 35 craters of the moon are named after Jesuits, among whose great scientific polymaths were Francesco Grimaldi and Giambattista Riccioli. The Jesuits also introduced Western science to India and China and translated local texts to be sent to Europe for study. Missionaries contributed significantly to the fields of anthropology, zoology and botany during Europe’s Age of Discovery. The Church’s patronage of sciences continues through elite institutions like the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and Vatican Observatory.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_science
Yep, just as anti-science as ever!
‘Belief in Science’ is an oxymoron.
No, not at all. Science is a philosophy. As with every other rational philosophy, it is entirely founded on unfalsifiable beliefs. Its power comes from the principles of transparency, reproducibility, and prediction, not a fanciful quest for reality.
IOW the foundation of science is the Scientific Method! And that method is using a system of procedures for gaining knowledge of how the natural world works . Or IOW reality! And at the heart of the Scientific Method is testability. A characteristic that a great deal of “climate science” appears to lack these days for various reasons. It is not really science until all data and methods are shared so that it can be tested.
Philosophy is not congruent with a belief system.
When witch doctors pretend to be scientists, it doesn’t make them scientists…
but it sure fools a lot of sheeple.
I can’t hear you! La-La-La-La-La …
I view NPR as ear rape.
“believe” in science
Nonsensical misuse of quotation marks makes you illiterate.
N= National
P= Proletariat
R= Radio
What is “scinece”.
Typical NPR, they don’t understand science and they can’t even spell it.
You do not ‘believe’i in Science, you examine Science. You ‘believe’ in Religion,,which is what Climate Science has become…..a religion.
Science is not necessarily something you need to believe in. Is a fact, ia reality! As for the church or religion, that’s something you can believe in. Anyway, it might be an issue since the Pope decided to get involved in the climate change debate……
Science requires testability and empirical evidence. It deals with all the things in the physical universe we can detect. It is used to attempt to describe, explain, and describe what is believed to be knowable. Math is the language of science because science relies on measuring what can be measured.
God cannot be measured nor tested and so spiritual belief is based in large measure upon faith. Religion deals in much that is unseen and cannot be subjected to the scientific method. Just because it cannot be measured or tested does not mean it does not exist.
For some, like me, there is room for both. I try to accept each for what it is and strive to understand when one is having undue influence on the other in the history and events of the world and within myself. But having pondered the heavens I have found that while looking up at a clear night sky that there no way I can not believe there is a creator.
For others only room for one.
I agree with your oppinion, although I prefer the idea of spirituality rather than religion.