Al gets his energy ultimately from the dirty ol' TVA, just like most everyone else in Tenn. He buys "carbon offsets" (through a company he created, so he profits) which are intended to be invested in renewable energy. The offsets don't literally reduce his "carbon footprint." And, yes, the planet is warming up, but we don't really know how much long-term change is attributable to human impact or how much global climate can be changed.

None of this would be an issue if Gore weren't demanding that others live an energy-austere life which he does not hold himself to. I'm not even so concerned about America. We're rich. Gore's economically disastrous policy ideas will make life more expensive and difficult for Americans. But his ideas will unquestionably increase suffering and limit economic opportunity for the poorest people on the planet. And yes, Cheney jets around on Air Force 2 -- but neither is he working to deny the rest of the world access to the most abundant and efficient sources of energy.

That's why it matters.

"I'm sorry. Microsoft DRM (Dining Rights Management) couldn't find a registered version of that recipe in your library. You will not be able to prepare this meal until you register this recipe."

There's also Bishop's Castle in Colorado. A guy started to build a stone cabin and decided as long as he was that far in, why not build a castle?

I've got some photos and comments about it on my blog, and there's a Roadside America article on it.

What, no words?

Fifty-freakin-six percent?!? That sound you heard was Copernicus and Galileo spinning in their graves.

"Eppur si muove!"

Wow! That is neat! Of course it would last about 2 minutes in new condition in a house with normal boys ("Take that! Pow!").

150 cm = just under 5 feet.

Words cannot express the total awesomeness of that.

saehn,

You were doing great up until your last phrase. Why the rancor against theism?

If it can't be proven or disproven, how can theism be a matter of "human ignorance"? You might as well say people who refuse to acknowledge Bach as the greatest composer ever are stupid.

People who refuse to learn are ignorant. Pompous jerks who are covinced of their own intelligence and heap scorn on others' beliefs may be ignorant. But people who believe in something that can neither be proven or disproven and which has enough evidence to make it reasonable are not ignorant.

"I challenge you to assert a single piece of solid scientific evidence supporting ‘god’."

That's the point. There can be no scietific proof either for or against the existence of a non-material being or intelligence. Science is not equipped to measure, observe, or "prove" any non-material reality. The claim to have "disproved" god (and the demand for supporting evidence) is impossible and illogical. It's a confustion of categories.

I that thesits have offered reasonable arguments for and evidence supporting belief in God, not proof.

Science does a great job at measuring and explaining effects, relationships, and processes. It cannot explain or address metaphysical cause. Theists are as justified scietifically to suggest a super-natural reality as atheists are to deny it. It's a category science doesn't address.

Science is concerned with measuring observable physical phenomena and developing hypotheses and theories to explain physical processes. It has nothing to say about about the supernatural -- that which is literally above or beyond nature. Both theism and naturalism are worldviews which can neither be proved or disproved scientifically.

So you're free to believe that scientific measurement of physical phenomena has "explained away God" or that theism is illogical, but you can't prove those assertions. They are conclusions scientific inquiry isn't equipped to reach.

"It is simply lack of belief in a god or gods."

That's agnosticism.

Atheism asserts a universal negative: that there can be no such things as gods. In order for atheism to be true, one would need exhaustive knowledge. Absent that, atheism requires faith. One may hold it's a reasonable belief, but it's still faith.

It's equivalent to saying, "There are no flying polka-dotted elephants." That no one has discovered one doesn't mean one can't exist somehwere in the universe. You can be agnostic about FPDEs and say it's unlikely they exist, but that's different from conclusively asserting they cannot exist (atheism).

Theists have presented evidence supporting the existence of God. That it is not universally accepted does not mean it's not true. And even if there were absence of proof, that's not the same as proof of absence, anyway.

It's a very early cell phone prototype.

You hold it by the handle, of course, and listen through the large earpiece. At this stage, Bell hadn't quite worked out the microphone part on bottom.

As someone who usually votes GOP, I thought the cartoon was funny and well-done. You have to be able to laugh.