ElishaElijah
Return
I did and they don’t, theory. You should be able to provide how much we have left and you can’t say because you don’t know.
Last edited:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Left wingers in USA seem to be more imperialist fascists than right wingers nowadays
- Thread starter Lars
- Start date
Left & right….they seem neck and neck to me.
The lead in the race for more authority over us changes regularly.
The lead in the race for more authority over us changes regularly.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
I provided these to you three pages ago:
Nonrenewable Resources
The Earth is exhausted - we're using up its resources faster than it can provide | DW | 01.08.2017
ElishaElijah
Return
The article says we continue to discover new reserves and then says the reserves are low, seems like a contradiction. This is the same tactic that climate change and global warming folks use. They’ve been saying East and west coast underwater by such and such dates, well those dates came and went since they started with the predictions.
Last edited:
They do and it's not that complicated.
"Theory?" If you're skeptical about theories, you must be skeptical about everything. The designation: "theory" carries the highest degree of confidence in science. There is nothing higher than a theory.
All this, of course, depends on usage rates, and exploration and extractive technology.
ElishaElijah
Return
In my opinion that’s problematic, the best it gets is a theory.
The easily discovered sources have already been found, mined, and, in many cases, exhausted. Remaining sources are increasingly remote, difficult to access, and often environmentally hazardous to exploit.
The environmental hazard of continued usage of them has become pretty clear.
Yes, we can probably continue exploiting fossil fuel for years -- if we're willing to pay the price -- but the price is proving dear.
Energy companies are pretty well set in their ways. They have the experience, expertise, and technology to continue conventional mining and marketing for years -- till legislation or the economy stops them. They realize this is inevitable, and are currently engaged in a desperate end game of exploration, accession, and, occasionally, extraction.
It comes down to a question of Earth vs economy; long term welfare vs next quarter corporate profits. I expect extractive industries to continue their lobbying; blocking regulation and sustainable energy legislation, for as long as they can.
But a 'theory' is the best there is. It's top-shelf.
What could be more reliable than a theory?
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
A scientific theory is about as good as it gets. Like germ theory of disease, or gravitational theory.
"A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts."
What Is a Theory? A Scientific Definition | AMNH
ElishaElijah
Return
As far as fossil fuels it’s a guess, because they don’t know, same with Climate. When the future predictions come and go and those predictions are wrong the excuses are made. People still hold on to the “science” and base their lives on a guess.
They're usually referring to proven reserves. Maybe they'll discover new sources - or maybe not. Perhaps if we dig deeper and deeper into the crust of the Earth, we'll find even more reserves. But there would be an environmental cost.
Yes. Perhaps underneath the Pacific Ocean floor, there's the mother lode of oil, gas, coal, gold, diamonds, and all kinds of other stuff. I remember many years ago hearing about the possibility of large oil reserves in Arizona, although that was a long time ago.
I've heard people say things along the lines of "we'll find oil no matter what, even if we have to drill in the Grand Canyon."
But there are enormous environmental and human costs that come with it. I still remember the Exxon Valdez and other infamous oil spills. Then there was that offshore oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico which exploded and led to weeks and weeks of oil spurting out of the sea bottom. They sure goofed up on that one.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
They know a lot, as previously discussed and demonstrated. Keep ignoring those informative links though, wouldn't want to learn anything, right?
Not sure what you're talking about. An example would be great.
You're jumping all over the place here and avoiding the point under discussion in this post, which is that a scientific theory isn't "just a theory" as you've tried to assert. Such an assertion reveals a lack of understanding of how the term is used in science, versus how it's used as by laymen. A scientific theory is actually "an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that has been substantiated through repeated experiments or testing." Exactly like germ theory of disease is a scientific theory. Do you reject that one too, or just the ones that disagree with your political beliefs?
"Just a Theory": 7 Misused Science Words
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I'm curious to find out.
ImmortalFlame
Woke gremlin
By that standard, you can never say we have a finite amount of literally anything, and arguing about it is meaningless.
These are estimates based on the best available information. Do you accept them or not?
Please provide a source that claims the east and west coast should have been underwater by now.
But these are facts. We're using resources faster than they can be replaced. That's the very definition of unsustainable.
As for climate change, that's been pretty well substantiated, and it's the expected result of the changes humans have wrought.
Is everything a guess, then? Germ theory? heliocentricity? evolution? How are any of these 'guesses'?
ElishaElijah
Return
If you don’t know then you can’t say especially when they’ve been wrong so much of the time. So seen as there is much unknown about fossil fuels and no way to know estimates then no I don’t accept the current estimates or running out dates. That being said I’m all for finding new technology for energy, using the best technology for the application.
ElishaElijah
Return
Whenever someone says “millions of years” yes I dismiss because that’s code for you have no clue. Human beings can be traced back to Adam and Eve, we have lineage and genealogy to prove that. Scientists say we used this or that to prove the age but they have no idea what was going on millions of years ago because human beings weren’t around. What I believe is God created the Earth and everything in it, He sustains and provides for His creation, especially human beings created in His Image. Are resources finite? Yes I believe they are. When will they be exhausted? When God ends this current Heaven and Earth and provides a New Heaven and Earth. From what I’m seeing around the world it may be sooner than later. That’s my view