Of course there is no such thing as settled law. After 100 plus years, Einstein is still being tested again and again. and anyone who thinks he's a better theory unsettles every theory. Newton, Galileo, even Crick & Watson get questioned again, re-philosophized, and tweaked again .. and again. That's the very nature of science ... Anyone who declares a law (or theory) as settled science either doesn't understand science, or is merely a political hack chasing glory or grants.

Remember the line (the accuracy/bonafides of which are still questioned) "We had to destroy the village in order to save it."? It was hailed as symbolizing the absurdity that the war had become. Certainly applies somewhat to some of the absurdities some scientists will go to as well, huh?

Not really. Only for those who don't know God, or what the Bible really says about creation. Which, unfortunately, is the case for far too many Christians.

Ignorance is no excuse Check the science, there has been NO WARMING in more than a decade. And climate is always changing, that's what it does. For billions of years. And only 30years ago the big SciFiction was Global Winter. Check the economics. The billions we spend won't cover a fraction of what THEY (the rest of the world) do to contribute carbon. But will make us all poorer. And Gov't and certain corporations much richer. Check nature. It has always thrived in the eras of high Co/Co2. And climate change has always been what it does. Check the motives of the pols who push the agenda Obama wants so bad. They get power & wealth, their friends and sponsors do too. But you don't. You just get poorer, and more controlled by rules & rulers (the bureaucrats. Check yourself. You gullible, or just like the new gov't handouts?

True, and for a long time already. In fact, the Bible itself describes a lot of them, speaking about sunlight and starlight and minerals and water and the yoman work of plate tectonic forces (leading to land, bringing outthe mineral porridge of the mantle and below, the cooling of the surface and emergence of "seas" and the atmosphere and hydrologic cycle. It even describes the "soup", by describing the waters in which life began, and from which it emerged onto the land, as "pisswaters" (read mucky shallows), etc. So Uri was hardly that much of a pioneer.

And, btw, what's wrong with a little "magic", as you call it" If I wanna make a lasagne, it helps to have the intelligence & forsight to to it, and a recipe and themagic of wallyworld to provide the various ingredients (even better with ready-made noodles and cheeses and sauces rather than trying to do it all fromcomplete scratch!) Gimme them and I can quite possibly even get the product I want by chance, if I just keep slamming the ingredients together a few (millions?) of times, in a fortuitously good environment (pan oven, etc?).

Lasagna ain't life, for sure, but I ain't nearly God. By definition, He's gotta be bigger than the universe he made and smart enough to design it and powerful enough to run it all - forever!

PS There's room enough to be open minded about this, and need enough for the tolerance tofor call off the culture and religious wars that are afflicting us, eh?

Can You? Two years ago I tried to set up an "XP Virtual Box" on advice of a computer tech, on my PC, running Win 7 Home. Wouldn't work, I was advised it was because XP Virtual won't run on a 64bit machine. They wrong? Can I upgrade and successfully get my XP VM, so I can run some prescious software (older, better version) that runs on XP, but nothing later?

I love 3D. Bought a Sony, which is a great TV system (Bravia, direct net access, etc.) even if it weren't 3D, and the glasses are no bother ... you gotta use them even in theaters. So while price is a real problem, THE BIGGEST problem is there's still only 3 decent movies available yet. 3 grand for a 3D TV is silly if you can only watch 3 movies!

Actually, no one (should) think "natural selection" means what YOU think it means.

You've confused that concept/term with evolution itself. Natural selection was an idea Darwin came to to explain the improbable history of life he believed in. He believed (more or less) that the present-day array of life forms on earth was the result of eons of "general improvements over time". That species were constantly changing (probably "improving", and generally increasing in their compplexity -- not from "humus", which is the end product of the death and decay of those higher life forms we call plants, but from single cell plants and animals to very complexly organized multicellular plants and animals, including humans) in order to better meet the challenges of the physical and intra-species environment. The challenges, that in nature offered no "winning tickets" but plenty of losing tickets, were what he meant by "natural selection". Evolution resulted, Darwin surmised, from species getting past those challenges, as better designs within their population remained and gained predominance.

Darwin actually got the idea from his observation of the human practice of animal husbandry. Throughout history, humans tended to practice "artificial selection". They got rid of (ate, discarded, prohibited from breeding) specimens of their domesticated species that they deemed less desirable, and encourage/aided the development of those which had "better" characteristics (prettier, more milk, more offspring, bigger eggs or drumsticks, etc.) from their point of view. Yep, that was "evolution" by human direction, and Darwin (biased by similar values) decided the remarkable panorama of life in all its splendor and complexity in his day must have been developed not by any similasr intelligent assistance (only God could have done such a thing, and Darwin was not fond of the idea of God or any other intelligent designer) so he settled for "natural selection" and a sort of Adam Smith theory of natural economics as the unseen hand that "evolved" the obviously great web of life now on earth.

Maybe, if you now understand "natural selection" and "evolution" a bit more accurately, you can rethink some of your own ideas and opinions.

By the way, there has always been global warming or cooling going on, sometimes far more drastic/extreme than what we are now noticing. And the theory of a metior/asteroid destroying (or ending) the preeminance of the dinosaurs is still a theory, and is actually being challenged quite rigoursly right now. And one can see, especially if one listens to PETA and so many of the environmentalist groups, that the idea that we are the epitome, or ultimate "improvement" in life forms, that there is indeed quite a set of values and judgements that stand behind the ideas of "evolution"