If you and I are ever walking down a dark downtown street and there's a couple guys up ahead, and I whisper, "Those guys look like bad news. Let's go this other way. Fast!"

My suggestion if you want to stay alive is not to start talking about baskets....

I could give you many such examples. The question is really ridiculous isn't it?

You've made a gigantic leap there from "roads" to "healthcare" and then to "all".

The US healthcare system is a mess BECAUSE of the lock that insurance companies and big providers have on the government. That's a Kapitalist-Socialist system illustrative of the evil that socialistic policy engenders, not the evil of capitalism.

If you want to ignore the institutional changes made possible by crypto coins and micropayments, go ahead.

Micropayments, using square codes, RFID, visual scanners, and crypto payments would conceivably enable every road to be operated and built by commercial companies.

This is an example of an activity that governments are no longer needed for. There are many others.

To any who may have found it unable to watch Trump's short talk, because Youtube search engine does not get you to it, but only to the Democratic response, here is a direct link. However long the link works, who knows. The POTUS speech begins at 20:00.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1Bw3YYj-bA

Expect much more of this sort of blatant censorship in pursuit of ideological and anti-American goals.

That's exactly right, although for "climate change", to the list of "corporations and private organizations" we must add governments, political forces, non-profit advocacy groups, and similar things.

To the question of the OP, the ONLY scientific response to any belief system assertion such as those of the "climate change ideology"  is skepticism.

Hello, Lysencho.

No they are not hiding.

Actually, there are certainly variations in the opinions of theists, and you seem to have made up "what atheists believe" and "what both believe."

My issue with your opinions is that they are nonsensical. I am not saying that in a perforative sense but strictly logical. Look at this phrase.

"before space and time."

How can there be a "before" if no dimension of time?

I probably understand what you are trying to say, but as written it makes no sense.

You'd like to think there was something bigger, vaster then the universe, in which a Supreme Being resides. Sort of a Giant House in which he has a jar of marbles of which this universe is one marble?

Thousands of years ago there was only the place called Earth, and the place called Heavens. That was the Universe as we understood it. It's considerably bigger today. It will quite likely be considerably bigger tomorrow than today.

It's quite common that a scientific article will contain on the first page some type of "statement of faith" regarding climate change.

For example, I recall one that said "The findings are consistent with man-made climate change."

Now that ACTUALLY means anything and everything. The findings may be consistent with 1001 things, but here is mentioned one. Regardless, the authors have done their job, with a secret smirk, and gone ahead with their research.

This article would have been counted in the sham "consensus" but in fact has nothing at all to do with climate change cause or effect.

Note this kind of clever double talk does not advance any realistic understanding.

For example, a scientist would answer YES if he thought the effect of humans was 0.001C in a hundred years, or YES if he thought the effect of humans was 2.000C in a hundred years.

Essentially, this is lying using a survey, and just another example of the politicalization of science.

No to the green rabbits / God outside or beyond space and time.

However you might note, it makes no practical difference whatsoever.

We really need one on our northern border, too. We could easily build it with Mexican labor, and it would stop the Democrat war mongers from trying to invade Canada.

Go first from three meals a day to two. Learn to like being hungry, since every hour of it is bunches of calories burned.

Then go from two meals a day to two. Very shortly you wil lose quite a bit of weight.

Always enjoy the hunger.

It's really that simple.

It takes one to know one. Ya think?

Having lived and traveled in many of the areas in question, I'm fine with it being declared a national emergency. Mainly because of the drug cartel violence, more so than the traditional illegal immigrants. But this new organized, 5-10,000 invasion force calls for some action.

Europe didn't, and they are regretting it.

At this time, dimensions are defined. Time is defined. Therefore, we exist and can discuss these things. Science cannot and will not address the situation prior.

I don't care if religious people want to speculate about it, but the scientific view would be that no discussion was possible about a universe totally undefined, without time or dimensions.

It's possible to be in conflict with science. For example, suppose a person claimed that green rabbits ruled the Universe before the beginning of time. The scientist would reply, no, that's contrary to Undefined. That's impossible. The green rabbits could only exist after the beginning of time and space.

Keep in mind that historical concepts of infinite, finite, forever, eternal and so forth, should not be expected to be as precise as modern words. That's okay, really. They did a pretty darn good job with what they had.

You have an idea what I am talking about because I have properly defined your behavior and told you what it was. At least, now you do.

The relation of immigration / aging population you mention works under certain controlled conditions. That is not what you propose, you proposed total chaos. And what you get from that is total chaos, duh.

Controlled immigration SUCH AS LEGAL IMMIGRATION CAN AND DOES take such economic theory into account.

Who knows? Let me know when we find signatures in DNA coded thusly, "Product of IDTheory Corp., Alpha Centauri."

As far as I am concerned you lost the argument from the get go with your unscientific statements which when reminded of, you responded with ad hominem insults.

Any idea how ridiculous that is?

This is not what the "Big Bang theory" asserts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_universe#Planck_epoch

Rather it considers there to be a transition from such things being "undefined" to their being "defined as energy, mass, etc."

"Undefined" is not "no energy, no mass." It is different than say the quantity 0. "Time" does not exist either, so there is no "before" and no "after."

Science does not have questions to ask of "undefined." As an example, take the case where the universe has shrunk to a single point, a singularity, and ask, "How big is that point?"

That is nonsense, of course. Science would ignore that issue (although as I have noted the words used in your question formulate a cause and effect scenario that has no meaning when "undefined" is taken into account. Thus, science may influence religious thought by improving phraseology, but excepting that it will not address the question you pose of "original causation."

You know, I would hope, that you have really presented a very unscientific viewpoint here.

(Go along with what I/we say the majority says on a subject.)

How does it feel to be in the same bag as people claiming Earth is flat or evolution is a lie?


Argument by ridicule.

You are smarter than this and can do better.