CO2 and 30 Years of FAILed Predictions

-
CO2 does not cause an increase in temperatures. That is because the earth is NOT a greenhouse and it is not a car with its windows up.

Do weather forecasters have to know the CO2 content before making their forecast? No. Why? Because CO2 does NOT cause an increase in temps. It just causes the heat to stay around a little longer. That alone is enough to skew the average daily temps making it appear warmer.

That is a fact. Only morons think that CO2 causes higher temps. If that were true then every day we should see record highs as we have record highs of atmospheric CO2.

Also it is a fact that there have been 30 years of FAILed climate predictions.



ETA:

CO2 only absorbs and emits the infrared @ 2.7, 4.3 and 15 microns (of which 15 is the major part), which is only about 8% of what the Earth radiates. The other 92% is invisible to CO2. And at 410 parts per million it also means every molecule of atmospheric CO2 is surrounded by just over 2400 molecules of non-CO2. Think of a "blanket" with the (single) thread surrounded by that much empty space or a screen with openings 2400x that of the wire. Neither is going to trap anything.

Waiting for Two Mutations

-
In 2008 a paper was published that allegedly refuted some of Dr. Behe's claims made in "Edge of Evolution". The title of the paper is "Waiting for two mutations: with applications to regulatory sequence evolution and the limits of Darwinian evolution". You can read it HERE. 

The paper has severe consequences for unguided evolution as it says that if specific mutations are required it may be out of the reach of unguided processes. Three such mutations would take millions, if not billions, of years to produce. So once sexual reproduction hit the scene most evolution would be out of reach via mutations.

So forget about gene duplication as a mechanism. For that you need the duplicated gene, a new binding site and then numerous specific mutations to get a new function from the old sequence. So all that is left is to rely solely on sheer dumb luck or miracles. And that means you don't have any science to support your claims.

Now I have an evoTARD claiming that the paper has been disputed and disregarded. That is actually true. It has been disputed and disregarded by IDists who know it does NOT refute anything ID claims. Meaning it did not do what the authors claimed. I don't know of any evolutionary biologists who have challenged it in peer-review and I am sure that Jerad doesn't either.

There hasn't been any work that refutes this paper's claims. There hasn't been any work that refines it such that it makes unguided evolution more plausible.

It is too funny when evolutionists, trying to refute ID, actually refute their own position.

East Coast Line-Up

-
@ 19:30 look to the WNW horizon to find Mercury, which is following the Sun as it sets.

Following Mercury you will see Venus (look West) in all of her bright Glory.

Our Moon is close behind (SW) with Jupiter visible in the SSE sky.

And in the ENE sky you will see Vega as she starts her journey across our view.

Enjoy