14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

A group of eggheaded scientific nerds, with the liberal-bias you'd expect from over-educated people, have published a list of 14 questions they want John McCain and Barack Obama to answer. Since John McCain obviously has more important things to deal with than what some group of dweeby pencil-necks thinks, I think we should answer the questions for him.

1. Innovation. Science and technology have been responsible for half of the growth of the American economy since WWII. But several recent reports question America’s continued leadership in these vital areas. What policies will you support to ensure that America remains the world leader in innovation?

My answer: by causing as many Americans as possible to get raptured to heaven. Once in heaven, we can continue our leadership and economic growth there. Let's see the European and Japanese are still able to invent new hybrid engines while swimming in the lake of fire!

2. Climate Change. The Earth’s climate is changing and there is concern about the potentially adverse effects of these changes on life on the planet. What is your position on the following measures that have been proposed to address global climate change—a cap-and-trade system, a carbon tax, increased fuel-economy standards, or research? Are there other policies you would support?

My answer: First of all, Climate change is caused by volcanoes, and is made up by the liberal-bias scientific community, with funding from the weather channel. Secondly, the rapture will come before the volcanoes can do much damage. Any even if they do, God will provide for us.

3. Energy. Many policymakers and scientists say energy security and sustainability are major problems facing the United States this century. What policies would you support to meet demand for energy while ensuring an economically and environmentally sustainable future?

My answer: There is enough energy in baby seal oil to fuel freedom for 200 years, and once the seals are depleted, there is also penguin oil.

4. Education. A comparison of 15-year-olds in 30 wealthy nations found that average science scores among U.S. students ranked 17th, while average U.S. math scores ranked 24th. What role do you think the federal government should play in preparing K-12 students for the science and technology driven 21st Century?

5. National Security. Science and technology are at the core of national security like never before. What is your view of how science and technology can best be used to ensure national security and where should we put our focus?

My answer: You know, I'm reminded of a beach boys song: Bomb-bomb-bomb, bomb-bomb Iran. And let's stay in Iraq for 100 years. People don't care if we stay there for 1,000 years or 10,000 years.

6. Pandemics and Biosecurity. Some estimates suggest that if H5N1 Avian Flu becomes a pandemic it could kill more than 300 million people. In an era of constant and rapid international travel, what steps should the United States take to protect our population from global pandemics or deliberate biological attacks?

My answer: Plagues are sent by God to punish those who disobey God. They will not trouble America once we have phased out the quaint and obsolute constitution and replaced it with Biblical law.

7. Genetics research. The field of genetics has the potential to improve human health and nutrition, but many people are concerned about the effects of genetic modification both in humans and in agriculture. What is the right policy balance between the benefits of genetic advances and their potential risks?

My answer: We will replace genetic engineering with intelligent designing, which is similar only we pray for new crops and so on.

8. Stem cells. Stem cell research advocates say it may successfully lead to treatments for many chronic diseases and injuries, saving lives, but opponents argue that using embryos as a source for stem cells destroys human life. What is your position on government regulation and funding of stem cell research?

My answer: Murderers will be given the death penalty.

9. Ocean Health. Scientists estimate that some 75 percent of the world’s fisheries are in serious decline and habitats around the world like coral reefs are seriously threatened. What steps, if any, should the United States take during your presidency to protect ocean health?

My answer: The last 25 percent of the fishes should do fine until the rapture. If not, read about Christ's miracle of the Loaves and FISHES, amen. God will provide for us.

10. Water. Thirty-nine states expect some level of water shortage over the next decade, and scientific studies suggest that a majority of our water resources are at risk. What policies would you support to meet demand for water resources?

My answer: Nonsense. Read this article here.

11. Space. The study of Earth from space can yield important information about climate change; focus on the cosmos can advance our understanding of the universe; and manned space travel can help us inspire new generations of youth to go into science. Can we afford all of them? How would you prioritize space in your administration?

My answer: While we understand that God place the lights in the firmament for giving us signs to read, we also understand that astrology is a form of witchcraft and that witches must be put to death. There, the creaters of the hubble telescope, and other devices used to study the lights in the firmament, will be given the death penalty.

12. Scientific Integrity. Many government scientists report political interference in their job. Is it acceptable for elected officials to hold back or alter scientific reports if they conflict with their own views, and how will you balance scientific information with politics and personal beliefs in your decision-making?

13. Research. For many years, Congress has recognized the importance of science and engineering research to realizing our national goals. Given that the next Congress will likely face spending constraints, what priority would you give to investment in basic research in upcoming budgets?

My answer: There's some new nuclear bomb R&D that looks promising.

14. Health. Americans are increasingly concerned with the cost, quality and availability of health care. How do you see science, research and technology contributing to improved health and quality of life?

My answer: The only way to eternal life is through Christ. Trying to make your life longer is a crime against dignity.

I would go longer and into more detail, but I want to give everyone a chance to help answer these questions.

Re: 14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

What's truly shocking is that our students rank second in their understanding of the truth of Godly creation science. It seems that liberal educrats and terrorist teachers' unions have allowed us to fall behind the country of Jiveturkey, or whatever it's called. We need to pray that Republicans will pass No Child Left Behind II to correct that problem.

Re: 14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

Dan.1

1. [4] Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.

Obviously a reference to a child as in Son of Cain, already having the understanding of Science & having the ability to stand in the King's place

Praise the wisdom of the Lord:jesus:

Re: 14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

Key point right here: God does not like cripples. Notice how many scientists are cripples: Steven Hawking is the most obvious example, Einstien was an autistic psycho, and nearly all the others wear glasses.


And, we at LBC have an understanding of science, we understand science perfectly: we understand that when science disagrees with God's word, science is false.

Re: 14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

McCain answered this question at the latest debate. On the subject of government spending on things like the "Bridge to Nowhere" he said about Obama: "...when you look at some of the planetariums and other foolishness that he asked for, he shouldn’t be saying anything about Governor Palin.”

It's good to know that John McCain thinks that planatariums and other forms of science education are foolishness. McCain's answer is sending the eggheads into hissy fits. :D Boo-hoo, McCain called you a fool. Get over it.

After all, the Bible states that the so-called "science" of these planatariums is complete hogwash: The Book of Revelations states that stars are not "giant balls of gas" but little things which can fall to earth. (Revelations 1:16, 6:13, 8:10, 9:1, 12:4)

Genesis clearly states the the moon is nothing but a "lesser light" hung in the sky. (Genesis 1:16)

Planatariums also claim that stars can be more than 6000 light-years away. From the Guide to the Evolutionist Conspiracy:

Scientists claim that light from many stars takes more than 6000 years to get from the star to us. That's nonsense, of course, because that star did not exist more than 6000 years ago!

Ancient star-gazers were only a thousand or two years from the date of creation, thus the light from the stars farther away than 1000-2000 light years could not have been seen. That means that all stars are closer to the Earth than 1000 light years, and that measurement techniques such as stellar parallax are just the devil's lies.

Re: 14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

I always laugh just a little whenever I hear a self-proclaimed "scientist" with his so-called degree from a diploma mill like MIT or Princeton claim that stars are "giant balls of gas". It always reminds me of sitting behind Brother Nathan during the Super Bowl after the wings have been served :lol::lol::lol:

On a more serious note, however, our next President will have to make the tough decision of whether to fund science like stem cell research and the search for so-called "alternative energy". Speaking as a scientist, the only science that we should fund is PRACTICAL science: like how to drill faster and how we can drill from here in the US straight across to the oil fields under the Middle East. Wouldn't it be so much more easy and cost-effective if we could Drill Baby Drill from our own back yard like Oklahoma and snag the oil right out from underneath the Middle East? They'd be hopping mad and we'd have gas for pennies! That's the kind of science that Exxon Mobil funds me for and that's the kind of science that GOD wants to see us pursue, not this foolishness of how to cure cancer and other Godly afflictions for sin.

Re: 14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

Good points, Brother Thurmond and Dr. Ville. All this secular babble about stars is just a theory; after all, the pointy-headed intellectuals haven't been there, any more than they were there when evil-ution supposedly happened.

Re: 14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

Planetariums are just like strip clubs for egg heads. These scientists go to these places and "get off" to images of planets and stars and constellations, down there in the dark where no one can see what they are doing.

Aside from the fact that these planetariums are breeding grounds for radical scientists to recruit children into their death-style (scientists rarely reproduce and stay virgins their entire lives). Lets face it-- we don't need more scientists in America. They do nothing but annoy us and challenge our faith. John McCain is 100% correct when he calls planetariums (and other scientific-related things) "foolishness".

Re: 14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

I think we're looking tpo far into Senator McCain's words here. When he said that spending more money on planetariums was foolish, he simply meant that it'd be a waste of money. With such advances as the Hubble telescope, planetariums are becoming less and less effective, and so less needed.

McCain actually supports expansion into Space. Here are the highlights of his plan for space exploration and NASA:

• Committing funding to NASA’s Constellation program including resources for human space exploration.

• Completing construction on the International Space Station National Laboratory.

• Making an effort to ensure that the United States has access to space during the time between the retirement of the shuttle and the replacement vehicle and reducing the time of the gap.

• Maintaining the United States‘ space and satellite infrastructure and support system.

• Investing in aeronautics research.

It's clear that McCain does not feel that space exploration is silly, just that wasting money on an outdated means of it is. And I've got to agree with the man on that.

Re: 14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

Do you even know what a planetarium IS, Liar? :haha:

An OBSERVATORY is used to look at stars. A PLANETARIUM is an enclosed structure where images of stars are projected, so that "scienticians" can indoctrinate students into the God-hating atheist dogma that stars are gigantic balls of flaming gas billions of miles away, rather than lights in the firmament placed by God.

Now, all True Christians™ know that:

Genesis 1: 14-16

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:


15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

So, if these planetariums were used to demonstrate how the stars are used for signs and seasons and days and years, they'd be worthy expenditures. Since they are used to promote atheism, they are a waste of our tax dollars.

John McCain knows as well as we True Christians™ that "space" doesn't exist. Instead, all that NASA funding gets routed to . . . er, more important things. :thumbsup:

Re: 14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

You know what tells me that scientists are evil? They always name their "discoveries" after themselves, and NOT the people in the Bible (KJV 1611). We should hire someone in the Creation Science department at Landover Baptist University to come up with a Christian periodic table of the elements. Where is Faithium, Jesusium, Noahinium, Ezekium, Mosesium and Abelium?

Re: 14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

Brother, I'm sure the "scienticians" would prefer names like "Jezebellium" and "Satanite". :angry:

Re: 14 Science Questions the Next President Should Answer
 

Luckily, Sarah Palin will be around to stop that nonsense.

There is no International Space Station, and I can prove it. When we first heard of the ISS, we were told that it would be a boon to science. So, please name ONE scientific achievement of the ISS. Just one. Can't do it? See? No space station, no scientific discoveries. That money was all diverted to useful things, like bonuses for the Wall Street bankers who tripled the Landover Baptist Church endowment fund by selling shares of Lehman Brothers and Freddie Mac short, and the Department of Faith's war on athiesm.