Archives for posts with tag: twisting of facts

I love science.

I happened upon an assertion that BPS is worse than BPA. I honestly can’t explain why anyone would care. EPA has caused far more harm than anything related to plastics, and EPA is getting worse, metastasizing to corrupt and deteriorate all that is good in America.

First, I have difficulty finding any information on BPS. I cannot tell that it has been substituted for BPA in plastic products. Bisphenol A is a common component of many plastics. As well as I can tell from a few minutes of internet search, Bisphenol S is only used in some epoxy resins. Epoxy resins are uncommon in most plastic products.

As to BPA, well, here is an article mentioning in passing while talking about chemistry in general, and Chemist Dr. Joe Schwarcz, http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/13-02-27/ Frankly, the concerns about BPA are exceptionally over hyped.

It astonishes me how the media will hype news of doom and gloom. When study after study (go do your own research–you won’t believe mine anyway) finds BPA to be inconsequential, the hype goes on, drumming on a few factoids and other studies that suggest maybe.

The climate change scare is the same. We can all look around and see it is not getting warmer. It is easy to review history and geology and see it has been warmer, much warmer, in the past. Yet, the scare continues, and people like me are likened to holocaust-deniers.

When it comes to most of the “chemicals” around us that are supposed to be so dangerous, I can only wonder why our life expectancy and general health continue to improve.

If everything is so bad for us, why do we keep living longer?

We Americans have so many problems because we have no real problems. (This applies to most of the world today, especially the rest of the Western world.)

The biggest threat to the well-being of the average person is government regulation. EPA is the most dangerous thing on earth. We will be better off to abolish it.

 

Advertisements

When the Focus on the Family organization produced their Truth Project DVD set, I was optimistic. Then I started hearing things. Then I started researching. I few friends looked into it. I heeded their opinions, and some of them worked through the lessons in small groups. Most were quite positive about it. Most of my friends are not particularly worried about exactness in scientific matters. I am. Most of my friends are not engineers. I am.

I quickly realized I could not let my children participate in the viewing in a small group setting, unless that small group was limited to only our family. It was clear that the Truth Project played fast and loose with the truth on occasion. While I think there may still be value in the series for my children, I wouldn’t consider sanctioning their viewing without me in control of the pause button and able to redirect, clarify, and correct. I may not be right, but I am daddy. My girls are all of age now, and I’ve deliberately and conscientiously taught my children to think and act for themselves. I don’t want them to be clones of me, but I am unwilling to let them hear something from authority that I disagree with unless they also hear my disagreement.

BioLogos presents an article by  Dorothy Boorse, here,  http://biologos.org/blog/science-and-the-truth-project-part-2 where she reviews the lesson-5 DVD in the Truth Project series.

Dr. Boorse presents a very clear case regarding the lack of truth in the lectures reviewed.

Perhaps I shouldn’t say lack of truth. Perhaps it is more a lack of commitment to THE truth; to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God.

The simple fact is that evolutionary theory is a tool. It is not a religion. It is not theology in any sense, but it is a good and useful tool. It works, and it works in an amazing variety of applications related to the biosciences. I’m not convinced it is useful in social sciences, but that might be more a failing of the social sciences in general rather than any particular tool utilized therein. It also might be an indication of my dislike and distrust of all things called “social science.”

Truth above all.

I follow Jesus, and He said He is the way, the truth, and the life. With that, truth becomes pretty much the most important thing in life. If I cannot stay absolutely committed to truth, I cannot see how I am committed to Jesus.

Regarding evolution in general, I find no incompatibility with the biblical assertion that God created man out of the dust of the earth and what Darwin’s theory has become. Dr. Boorse mentioned Howard J. Van Till and the fully gifted creation. I find his views are very similar to my own. This reference, http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/origins/methods-hvt.htm, is a good summary.

I can recommend this book: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0310220173/discoveryinsti06/102-8881394-1506531?creative=327641&camp=14573&adid=1PHAFTFCXGHBRDD591CP&link_code=as1

I read it while taking an online course from Dr. Hugh Ross’ Reasons.org about creation and evolution.

Anthony Watts rightly makes fun of the Mann-child and the Lewandowskyites here, http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/11/01/mann-and-lewandowsky-go-psychotic-on-skeptics/

Anthony correctly states that the alarmists are losing the argument so they are now trying to suppress dissent. (Not new, actually. It has been part of their tactics from the beginning.)

Anthony correctly points out that this is the tactic the soviets used where they asserted that only crazy people would disagree with them, so those who disagree must be locked away and medicated into oblivion and silence.

I agree with Anthony that the likes of Mann and Lew need professional counseling and help. If they are not yet dangerous to themselves or others, they are likely to be soon. They really seem to need help. The paper sited is truly sad. Emotionalism, not science.  Read the rest of this entry »

FIGURE 1. Alleged ancient depictions of dinosaurs at Kachina Bridge, Natural Bridges National Monument, Utah.

via. http://palaeo-electronica.org/2011_1/236/fig_1.htm

This is ONLY the figure that goes with the article. I’ll post that up next. Still, I wanted to get this specifically.

As I commented regarding assuming petroglyphs could be evidence of aliens, they cannot be evidence of sauropods either.

Regarding the Gleick fraud and defaming of Hearthland Inst. in the “cause” of global warming:

“That is the message of Gleick’s theft and Horgan’s equivocations. Together, they shine a spot light on the moral swamp that climate science has become.”

via Lying for the Cause? » Counterpunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names.

To anyone reading Mr. Spinney’s article, take with a grain of salt. He does make some solid points.

%d bloggers like this: