Many homes around here have many more than 8 panels, and outside my home I can see more windfarms than most folks could possibly imagine. The local Whitstable/Herne Bay farm is huge, but the distant London array Farm is gigantic. Our government has not been sleeping.
Good to read.
Eight panels and the solar water heater are enough to power our home. We live closer to the equator than you do, and receive over 2000 hours of high sun a year, meaning that each panel receives and harvests a relatively large amount of sunlight.
I've watched quite a bit of documentary television about Western Europe revealing all kinds of wind farms, including massive arrays of windmills in the North Sea and the Norwegian Sea. Even in the background shots of various ports and piers, I frequently see windmills.
Congratulations to your government and culture for its contribution to the welfare of the world as well as making itself politically and economically more secure.
I perceive early Genesis as metaphor.
Yes, you've told me that. What I've asked you before is, metaphor for what? Metaphors represent something else, as when I say that somebody is a pistol. It's clear that the pistol is a metaphor for a certain kind of explosive or energetic personality and demeanor.
What does Genesis represent? Are you saying that it stands for what really happened?
I don't see why we don't simply call Genesis what it appears to be - an account of the early earth that was once widely believed as written, but is now known to be mostly wrong.
your sentences .. suggest that Science of itself can do not wrong. Science of itself cannot be wrong. Science of itself is all knowledge regardless of whether discovered or not. Science is therefore a kind of Godhead.
You're reading into my words and injecting a message of your own invention into them - not the one I offered. What I wrote is that science is not responsible for the ways that government and industry apply it, not that science is all knowledge, and certainly not anything supernatural or religious about it.
Science deserves our respect and our gratitude. There is nothing else like it. I mentioned to you the recent explosive revolution in forensic science in an earlier post, one which has made police investigations and courtroom trials much more likely to correctly identify the guilty and exonerate the innocent, which has been of benefit beyond just ensuring justice.
Because of the forensic evidence, many of these cases are so compelling that the accused simply confesses to avoid an inevitable conviction and a harsher sentence, thus saving the taxpayer and both the families of the victim and defendant the cost and ordeal of a trial, not to mention the disincentive of having future potential criminals come to believe that if they commit such crimes, they'll probably be caught however careful - however much one scrubs up the blood, stages the crime scene, avoids leaving fingerprints, or tries to collect the spent shell casings.
That progress deserves a standing ovation. Once again, science has improved the human condition making life better. Acknowledging that is hardly turning science into more than it is or deifying it as you have suggested.
But you are correct that science itself doesn't do harm. It just tells us how the world works. The worst it can do is to get that wrong.
Big enough to seem like a worldwide flood to the witnesses.
What matters is if they witnessed the flood described in Genesis - not just any big flood. You could recognize the biblical flood had it occurred as the one that inundated all dry land following a 40 day rainstorm, and killed all but eight people. If that's not what these witnesses were looking at, then their witness is irrelevant to the matter of whether the biblical flood occurred or not.
Personally, I think that global flood myths are the result of finding marine fossils at high altitudes in mountains that were formally sea floors. It was certainly easier to envision the water rising to the level of the highest mountain tops than to picture the mountain rising that far out of the sea. And of course, routine floods, which aren't miles deep, wouldn't account for that finding anyway.
Also, when we explain the Bible in terms of the limitations and shortcomings of the people of the past and their misinterpretations of observed phenomena, we're basically taking the magic and divinity out of scripture and rendering it an ordinary human endeavor of historical value only, not a divine guide to living and learning.
