John Spencer Yantiss - Science

<< John Spencer Yantiss

Topics

Opinions

The use of nuclear weapons can be justified. Justifiable use has already occurred. Anyone who cares to truly, as the now popular saying goes, "do the math," to wit, serious research, ignoring the misbegotten, "politically correct" pronouncements on Truman's decision to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki, will find that if he had not made that decision, many, many, many more casualties, on both sides would have been the result. The saying, "war is hell," is an apt description; and "hell" is not something governed by the Geneva Conventions, or any other "humane" set of controls. By definition, war is NOT controlled; otherwise it is not war, but "war games." REAL war does not recognise restraint. That is why it is HELL. That is why good, really good, humane generals, admirals, colonels, navy captains, and on, and on, seek to employ means, tactics, that will END a war as quickly as possible, but to do so they must use weapons that will force--the word here is FORCE--the aggressor to stop, to surrender--to quit!

Human beings are not still evolving. We never did evolve, so the question is moot. If anyone cares to do absolutely thorough research, disregarding the pervasive mis-information and bogus "facts," it will be clear that there is no concrete evidence of macro-evolution. Micro-evolution--that possible within the perameters of a species' DNA--is NOT evidence of macro-evolution. Mutants CANNOT breed; therefore, any significant mutation results in a deadend.

Viruses are alive. Until they are killed, they are--Oh!--alive!

Innate qualities have a greater influence on human behavior than environmental factors.

Animal cloning should not be allowed.

Emotions are contagious.

Humans should not colonize the moon.

It should be legal for scientists to develop genetically modified human embryos.

The US should intervene with nuclear programs in other countries.

Psychologists should not be able to prescribe medication.

Human cloning should not be allowed.

There is no intelligent life on other planets.

There are legitimate, scientific, and peer-reviewed "alternatives" to evolution.

There are legitimate, scientific, and peer-reviewed criticisms of evolution.

Nobody should decide whether embryonic stem cells may be used for medical research. It's too dangerous and must be prohibited.

The federal government should not subsidize the creation of new stem cell lines.

Scientists should not pursue embryonic stem cell research.

The U.S. should build more nuclear power plants.

Patents should not be issued for living organisms.

Innate qualities have a greater influence on human behavior than environmental factors.

Emotions are contagious.

UNKNOWN: Should NASA complete construction of the International Space Station?

UNKNOWN: Should NASA focus on manned space flight?

UNKNOWN: Do adult stem cells have the same medical potential as embryonic stem cells?

UNKNOWN: How much should the U.S. invest in its space program?

UNKNOWN: Is protecting potential life or saving existing life more important?

UNKNOWN: How "old" is the Earth?

UNKNOWN: Should theories that no conceivable experiment can confirm be rejected outright?

UNKNOWN: Do ghosts exist?

UNKNOWN: Is a large ego necessary to being a successful politician?

UNKNOWN: Will humans make contact with intelligent extraterrestrial life?

UNKNOWN: What is the shape of the Earth?

UNKNOWN: Will humans ever travel faster than the speed of light?

UNKNOWN: Does a belief in natural selection require a belief in evolution?

UNKNOWN: Should Congress fund NASA's program to track potentially hazardous asteroids and comets?

UNKNOWN: Is the Universe expanding?

UNKNOWN: Should humans travel through time?

UNKNOWN: Will humans one day travel through time?

UNKNOWN: Is research published in peer-reviewed scientific journals reliable?

UNKNOWN: Are there alternate universes?