Free Energy!... for the low, low price of $1,100,000,000,000

there's an idea going around that the US could provide "free energy" in the form of solar panels for every household in America... and while i'm completely for this idea, as a general rule, there are some nasty facts out there to deal with... let's begin.

there are, at best account, around 316,000,000 people in America.

averaging about four people per household (discounting all arguments regarding apartment dwellers, the homeless, and hermits), we have about 79,000,000 homes to furnish with solar panels.

each solar panel will cost about $10,000 in material, and we can estimate (on the low side) $5,000 to install... we all know that electricians charge a lot (no pun intended), so that is probably really low.

79 million X $15K = $1,185,000,000,000... that's $1.1 trillion.

"Well that's what we spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, combined! Make solar, not war!"

well, aside from the costs of NOT going to war, like allowing terrorists to train in these regions, the continued slaughter of the innocents by Saddam Hussein and the Taliban, and additional strikes on US foreign and domestic target, we'll tentatively agree that we could use a similar amount of money to provide solar panels... we're talking possibility here, not ideology.

so, if it's possible, why aren't we funding that?

well, because we have a small problem:

Thin, cheap solar panels need tellurium, which makes up a scant 0.0000001 percent of the earth’s crust, making it three times rarer than gold.

when the rush to build solar panels increases, the value of these "rare earth" materials will rise exponentially... the cost will be much more than those simple numbers above, because a high demand and a low supply will increase costs dramatically.

so, while, on the surface, it sounds like a great idea, one i'm totally behind... in reality, it's not that easy.

but nothing worthwhile ever is.

i've told you a trillion times

US Debt = $17,322,966,800,000
but what is a "trillion"?... how do you conceptualize a number this large?

US Debt converted to seconds:
1 trillion seconds = ( 10^12 sec)/( 3.16 x 10^7 sec/yr) = 31,688 years
17.3229668 x 31,688 yr = 548,932 years

Homo-erectus lived 500,000 years ago. Neanderthals didn't evolve until nearly 300,000 years later.

US Debt converted to hours:
1 trillion hours = ( 10^12 hr)/( 8,766 hr/yr) = 114,077,116 years
17.3229668 x 144,077,116 yr = 1,976,154,095 years ~ 2 billion years

The only known living organisms 2 billion years ago were a form of algae. The first oxygen was produced on Earth.

US Debt converted to days:
1 trillion days = ( 10^12 days)/( 365.25 days/yr) = 2,737,850,787 years
17.3229668 x 2,737,850,787 yr = 47,427,698,289 years ~ 50 billion years

The universe is only 13 billion years old. So 50 billion is truly meaningless.

US Debt converted to light-years:
17,322,966,800 miles / 5.878625 mi/ly = 2.95 light years ~ 3 light-years

The Andromeda Galaxy is a spiral galaxy approximately 2.5 million light-years (2.4×1019 km) from Earth.
Proxima Centauri is a red dwarf [star] about 4.24 light-years from Earth.

---

source:
US Debt Clock - February 10, 2014
How Big is a Trillion? - NASA

defeating Darwin, Nye, Ham, and Fisher

i discuss Bryan Fisher, of AFR, and his discussion of Bill Nye and Ken Ham who discussed scientific atheism vs. intelligent design... there's a lot of discussion going on, so let's get right to it... we'll skip ahead to Fisher's "Defeating Darwin in Easy Four  Steps", which is predicated on Ham's highlights, primarily those which confounded Nye the most.

First Law of Thermodynamics. This law (note: not a theory but a scientific law) teaches us that matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed. In other words, an honest scientist will tell you that there is nothing in the observable universe that can explain either the origin of energy or matter. By logical extension, then, matter and energy had to come into being by some force outside the universe.

what is the primary cause?... if all other things are secondary effects, what is the primary cause?... where did this "Great Ball of Matter/Energy" come from?
on a secondary note, i laugh whenever i hear the phrase "seeing light from the Big Bang"... apparently space unfolded faster than the speed of light, and light from the "Bang" had to catch up to the heavy matter out on the perimeter... think about that for a second, and you'll see why i find that hilarious.

Second Law of Thermodynamics. This law (note: not a theory but a law) teaches us that in every chemical or heat reaction, there is a loss of energy that never again is available for another heat reaction. This is why things break down if left to themselves, and why scientists tell us that the universe is headed toward a heat death.

of course, the simple answer is a reduction in entropy in one place is balanced/offset by an increase in entropy elsewhere... this is some quantum magic, apparently... where our planet has a decrease in entropy through evolution, there must be an equal increase in entropy somewhere else... my (sarcastic) guess would be on Mars... because no one likes Martians.
also, through this Law, we naturally arrive at the conclusion that, from the current entropic state, there is an "original ordered state" of zero entropy; an "Initial Singularity"... the first moment of entropy is colloquially called "the Big Bang"... since entropy is one of those non-reversible laws, it stands to reason that there is no way the original ordered state could ever be reached through natural processes; the Initial Singularity has no precedent nor any subsequent equal... so, where did it come from?... it just was... there is no determining where it came from nor the first cause from which all others derived... should we take that on "faith"?

Fossils. Realize that the fossil record is the only tangible, physical evidence for the theory of evolution that exists. The fossil record is it. There is absolutely nothing else Darwinians have they can show you.

even if we accept Darwinian evolution, which is entirely plausible in my opinion, what does this add or detract from the debate over "Intelligent Design" or the existence of God?... this is simply a mechanism for modification... where self-determinism fails to react to environmental stresses, successive generations are able to adapt and survive through biological processes... simply because evolution is not described in a collection of religious texts, this only proves the incompleteness and necessary brevity of the text... this does not describe an incomplete God.

Genes. The only mechanism – don't miss this – the only mechanism evolutionists have to explain the development of increasingly complex life forms is genetic mutation. Mutations alter DNA, and these alterations can be passed on to descendants. Catch these two quotes. First, evolutionary microbiologist James Shapiro of the University of Chicago: "There are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of any fundamental biochemical or cellular systems, only a variety of wishful speculations." And this from University of Bristol scientist Alan Linton: "Throughout 150 years of the science of bacteriology, there is no evidence that one species of bacteria has changed into another. None exists in the literature claiming that one species has been shown to evolve into another."

genes and fossils are two parts of the same debate, for which there is no necessary reason for discussion, as pointed out previously... one does not negate the other (e.g. evolution and God)... genes are simply mechanisms for either argument, not the argument, themselves.

---

source:
Defeating Darwin in four easy steps By Bryan Fischer, February 6, 2014