Science is NEVER settled. Gravity isn’t settled. Einstein’s theory of general relativity predicts gravity waves. Such have never been detected. There is a large, expensive, government funded experiment going on right now in an attempt to detect the gravity waves. It is called LIGO. Look it up. SCIENCE IS NEVER SETTLED! If it was why are all those science projects in our universities being funded. I swear the only thing that I’m sure has settled is the sludge between Mr. Kerry’s ears.
 March 4, 2015 at 4:46pm
It’s curious to me how few people seem to recognize that the choice before us is war with Iran before they have a nuclear weapon and war with Iran after they have a nuclear weapon. All the rest of the palaver is just wishful thinking.
Rep. King must think that living in a dictatorship is a good thing. Hanging on to freedom isn’t easy Pete.
 February 27, 2015 at 10:22am
The bottom line is that the earth in indeed warming AND that the climate models are worthless. I.e. the climate is far to complex to simulate. There are and infinity of variables and our computers are far far to slow to get the job done. Therefore: It’s happening and all the predictions of the consequences will be wrong.
December 6, 2014 at 12:46pm
Mr. Pool’s comment is totally transparent. First take the guns away from the police. Then to protect the police you have to take all guns away from everyone else. But only the law abiding citizens would surrender their guns leaving the only people with guns being the criminals. Just why the anti-gun folks want only criminals to be armed is something I don’t understand.
Remember, in their little defective brains they believe if you confiscate all law abiding citizen’s guns, then ALL guns will magically disappear. I know, there is no logic or rationale to it, but, that is pretty much what liberalism is; illogical and irrational.
 November 17, 2014 at 9:58am
Jon Gruber is a very rare bird. An honest progressive! The first one ever in my experience.
 November 16, 2014 at 3:13pm
Jet aircraft condensation trails. Pilots put them there not God.
BUR-- It isn't. SO------------ mind your own business.
 November 10, 2014 at 1:03pm
On the MIT faculty?? Gruber is an archetypical example of moral turpitude. But MIT will ever dismiss him for his egregious behavior? No, because Gruber is a member of a protected class, the liberal college professors. So don’t hold your breath.
 October 22, 2014 at 12:03am
It’s good to hear him say it. “I am more loyal to my boss than I am to either my country or my oath of office.” And we are supposed to get together with people like that and work for the betterment of the country. NOT POSSIBLE! Nothing good could come from such an alliance. Deadlock is far far better.
 October 15, 2014 at 2:28pm
Morally bankrupt youth have already become our leaders.
 October 15, 2014 at 2:19pm
Now, after a decade of piling feces on George Bushes head, we learn that there were indeed WMD in Iraq. The government lies, the media covers for them, and we end up DEAD!
 October 15, 2014 at 2:10pm
The incompetent careerist bureaucrats will be the death of us all.
October 13, 2014 at 1:28pm
Neither theism nor atheism are rational. There is no experiment that will prove the existence of the supernatural. There is no experiment that will prove the non-existence of the supernatural.
Being a theist or an atheist requires an act of faith. Belief is an opinion and nothing more. It doesn’t matter whether your belief is in God or in no God, it’s still just an opinion.
Ethics and morality exist without the need for an act of faith.
Ethics and morality is based on something. God is, was, and will be He is the foundation for faith, ethics and morality. How does a person know how to breath? We are created to breath air and seek God.
Some 'athiests' say there is no god. Most of us simply say we see no evidence of a god. There is a huge difference in those positions. I don't think you can 'prove' there is no god because logically it is impossible to prove a negative.
Why does there need to be an experiment to "prove" some thing for it to be rational?
"There is no experiment that will prove the existence of the supernatural. There is no experiment that will prove the non-existence of the supernatural."
Experiments, in the classic sense that I believe you are using, requires material, intelligence, and instrumentation. Without material, you have nothing to experiment on. Without intelligence, you have no formation of hypothesis, design of the experiment, or the ability to analyze the results of the experiment. Without instrumentation, you have no ability to measure and collect the data that will be used for analysis.
Where did the material come from? Why does the material exist? If it "just exists", why does it exist here and now so you can experiment on it?
Where does intelligence from from? Why do some people have the intelligence to experiment and others not? Why does man have this intelligence that can understand his surroundings and pass it on to subsequent generations? Why does man WANT to pass that information to subsequent generations?
How did our original instrumentation (eyes, tongue/taste receptors, ears, nerve endings, smell receptors) all come about at the same time and why do we need them "just to survive"?
Experimentation attempts to discover and quantify the nature of the physical world. (What is the gravitational acceleration? Etc.) Yet experimentation cannot and does not measure non-physical realities (God, love, despair, etc.)
 October 13, 2014 at 1:13pm
“NIH Director Francis Collins said in an interview with the Huffington Post that his agency had been working on Ebola vaccines since 2001. But he said that research was interrupted by the sequester, which led to cuts in spending across many parts of the government.”
That is utter nonsense unless you’re ready to believe that there isn’t a single thing in the NIH budget that is less important than an Ebola vaccine. An NIH bureaucrat’s decision is what slowed or stopped development of an Ebola vaccine, not a budget cut. Could it be that the NIH director is either stupid or dishonest?
 October 10, 2014 at 3:31pm
Anwar Sadat actually did something to earn his Nobel. As did Malala Yousafzai. Sadat was killed by the Muslim Brotherhood for his deed. Let us hope that the Talaban never gets close enough to Malala to try again to kill her. Here’s a question for the defenders of Islam: Is there a mosque anywhere in the world that Malala can SAFELY enter on a Friday? Don’t all of you speak up at once.