A key passage for interpreting Revelations is the right at the start of the book,

Rev 1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John,

So, I am pretty sure these RFID tags have nothing to do with the "mark of the beast", as almost 2000 years must surely be a stretch for "soon". They are similar in that the mark of the beast was necessary to "buy and sell" (i.e. government approval required) -- and the RFID tag being necessary to get the "public education".

No, having said that, if the person really believes that, I don't see how the government should be able to "force the child" to carry their RFID tag, as I am pretty sure that a public education is a constitutional right in Texas. -- That's the thing about rights, they are there to protect when even when your right is not popular (yes, even if it is stupid).

Even more importantly, this ignores a previous published article on "DNA Sequence from Cretaceous Period Bone Fragments" -- Science 266 (5188) 1229-1232, here is a PDF of the article in Science. Either 80 mya (Cretaceous) is horribly wrong, the 521 year half-live of DNA is horribly wrong, Woodruff, et al were horrible deceived (or frauds) or some combination of these.

You would hope evidence would be the deciding factor, but scientists are human too, and the interpretation of evidence is often more important than the actual evidence -- it is very hard to upset to prevailing opinion (as it should be when the opinion is well founded)

Yes, you appear to be slow thinking today (It happens to everybody).

kilometers per second how fast 2 galaxies recede from each other.
mega parsec is a really long distance (3.26 light years / 19 trillion miles / 31 trillion kilometers)

The further away the galaxies, the faster they recede.

E.g., if 2 galaxies are 100 MegaParsecs apart, then they should be separating from each other at about 100 * 74.3 = 7430 kilometers per second.

Clicky ads generation is a given, but the program is real.

You are not necessarily seeing smoke because they have not changed their oil in 2 years, you might be seeing smoke because of unburned fuel (soot) in the exhaust -- Not changing your oil will lead to excessive blowby after time, but you can take a brand new diesel engine and make black smoke by dumping in extra fuel, as you will see then under load at low speeds. Done it myself many times when working on test stands at Cummins -- 90% plus opacity in the exhaust. Modern control systems reduce the overfueling.

Carbon / Sodium battery not sugar battery. Must be just like Spenda -- We processed sugar so that it is no longer sugar, so we can make a stupid claim that gets your attention because you are fooled into thinking it is somehow made of sugar.

Considering we spend about 900 billion per year on education, more than any other industrialized country -- both in total and per capita maybe spending an extra 0.5 billion per year is just pissing in the ocean. We have doubled per capita inflation adjusted dollars since 1980 -- somehow spending an additional 0.01% is not likely to be a game changer.

I remember otherwise, 6.5 ounces -- just checked the source too.

The US generally pays the same for fossil fuels as any other country in the world -- O you mean the US should raise taxes on fossil fuels to the levels seen in Europe, etc. so that the end-user has to pay a painfully high price. There are a number of different possible ways to reduce your carbon footprint if that is the goal. Tax policy is usually best left to the locals -- taxation without representation seems to be a bit of a sticking point here in the US.

I believe we should be reduce our carbon footprint by quite a bit, but I think the idea of taxing fossil fuels to double costs smells worse than an oil refinery and I'll tell my congressmen to vote against it. I might even use strong language.

I don't know, but it sounds that being paid to be a to do stuff like this would be pretty awesome too. Maybe I can make a career change and become a researcher too.

Reading Flowers for Algernon or watching the movie Charlie could be considered research too.

On the contrary, there is lots of evidence. You compare the qualities of the source material, e.g., the Bible vs. Quran, etc. -- the quality that you are looking for is complete and unerring truth. Likewise, review the testimony of witnesses to the writers of the source material, are they credible, intelligent, etc. Do they back the claims of the writers. You compare the hostile testimony, with special emphasis on the hostile testimony to those that were witnesses of the original writers. In other words, you treat the claims of religious authority just like you would that of any other subject.

You will discover find that some writers have little credibility, others have more. You may eventually conclude that none of them are credible or you may eventually conclude that one source is credible, but you should do so based on the evidence. If you don't care what the evidence shows, that is your choice. But there is evidence that would allow you to decide if you considered it carefully.

And this is why if you have been seated for a jury in recent history you very likely were briefed that real-life is not like Hollywood. The cops do not always collect finger print , DNA, or video evidence of the crime. And that you should not acquit using "reasonable doubt" just because these "iron-clad" evidences are missing -- They are not "iron-clad" when present and not evidence of "innocence" when missing.

Legal body disposal is not terribly expensive, about 10 years ago my father was cremated and "disposed of" -- total cost 1000 USD. Per his request, there was no funeral service but we had a pizza party at Noble Romans open to friends and family. We spent about as much on pizza as we did disposing of the body.

Funerals and fancy caskets, vaults, etc. -- now you are talking real money.

Clearly you are not a lawyer. A Good Samaritan defense for use of lethal force is perfectly viable in many jurisdictions, often explicitly excluded from the definition of homicide. E.g.,
Mississippi code 97-3-15 paragraphs e&f.

It might even be considered the moral thing as well depending on the circumstances.