Got a link for this?

I don't know that Hawking is catholic, but according the the information I'm quoting below he is not an atheist...

Here are some quotes from a lecture given by Dr. Fritz Schaefer III, Professor of Quantum Chemistry, University of Georgia

Stephen Hawking has stated, "It is difficult to discuss the beginning of the universe without mentioning the concept of God. My work on the origin of the universe is on the borderline between science and religion, but I try to stay on the scientific side of the border. It is quite possible that God acts in ways that cannot be described by scientific laws, but in that case, one would just have to go by personal belief."

Now, lest anyone be confused, let me state that Hawking strenuously denies charges that he is an atheist. When he is accused of that he really gets angry and says that such assertions are not true at all. He is an agnostic or deist or something more along those lines. He's certainly not an atheist and not even very sympathetic to atheism.

And from A Brief History of Time

"These laws may have originally been decreed by God, but it appears that he has since left the universe to evolve according to them and does not now intervene in it" (p. 122).

."..if we do discover a complete theory, it should in time be understandable in broad principle by everyone, not just a few scientists. Then we shall all, philosophers, scientists, and just ordinary people, be able to take part in the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist. If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason - for then we would know the mind of God. (p. 185)

Doesn't that mean that there is a "viable" alternative to fossile fuel as demonstrated by Maine's 30% Renewable Standard?

Not really. Maine represents a very small percentage of the US's power generation. In 2003, the US generated 1,970,273 thousand megawatt hours of electricity with coal. By comparison, 84,174 thousand megawatt hours were generated through non-hydroelectric renewable sources.

So, we would need 23 times our current non-hydroelectric renewable power in order to replace coal.

Link

Just because we are not doing it currently, does not mean that the alternatives are not "viable" or will not be viable in time.

most on the left belittle Bush as an ignorant stupid bufoon,

Thanks for the "most." As someone on the Left, I have never posted that President Bush is an "ignorant, stupid buffoon" or words to that effect. Moreover, I think those who do so fall into a dangerous trap of underestimating him. His verbal disfluencies may be amusing or embarassing at times, they may even be an indication of a learning disability, but one would be truly wrong to assume he is not gifted with a considerable intelligence and talent for leadership. Nor do I buy popularized arguments that he is the "figurehead" or "puppet" of a secret cabal of neo-con shadow warriors. He is actively involved in his administration's policy making and national/international agenda. By all accounts, he is quite impressive interpersonally -- and his considerable rhetorical skills (despite a disfluency here and there) have only increased over his years in office.

It's easy to dismiss what you don't agree with as ignorant and uninformed. The Left (as "represented" by Maher and others) is guilty of this, but so is the Right. Hang around these discussion boards long enough and you'll hear plenty of folks dismiss the opposition as "ignorant," "out of touch with reality," "the new court jester," and so forth. Call foul when you see someone do this, no matter which side of the political fence you or they are on.

I disagree with the Bush administration's polices and worldview. But I acknowledge that it is not a fringe view and that it appeals to a lot of people in this country. But it also DOESN'T appeal to all of people in this country. We can get hung up on majority and plurality and winning, but in the end if all we do is denigrate large chunks of the population we're not going to be very effective at doing anything.

Well, if those who were watching Bill Maher instead of the recent "Origins" series on PBS's Nova,all those wacko-liberal atheists might just have discovered that the current scientific evidence is leaning heavily toward Intelligent Design. God may or may not be who or what you believe him/her to be but if you want to continue being an achiest, your going to wind up like those that yelled "No, No, No the world is FLAT".

The problems on this planet can be boiled down to just two major issues:

1. Run-away greed.

2. Islamic fundamentalist fanaticism.

The first is an age old issue but is getting more dangerous every day. Still, something I can deal with on a personal level, I may go with out a job but I would still be alive.

The second is a more immediate danger. This ideology preaches that all infidels must be eradicated eventually... starting now! This ideology must be dealt with aggressively, if your a liberal who doesn't have a stomach for this, maybe we could send YOU into negotiate with Osama.

An escalation of war is inevitable, better to take it to them than let them bring it to us. I don't like the body count any more than any rational person - but war IS hell. We didn't start their religion OR their war.

Bush is by no means the perfect choice, but vote for Kerry? are you living in a cave?

Thanks for the "most."

You are welcome, and thank you for responding on point.

As someone on the Left, I have never posted that President Bush is an "ignorant, stupid buffoon" or words to that effect. Moreover, I think those who do so fall into a dangerous trap of underestimating him. His verbal disfluencies may be amusing or embarassing at times, they may even be an indication of a learning disability, but one would be truly wrong to assume he is not gifted with a considerable intelligence and talent for leadership. Nor do I buy popularized arguments that he is the "figurehead" or "puppet" of a secret cabal of neo-con shadow warriors. He is actively involved in his administration's policy making and national/international agenda. By all accounts, he is quite impressive interpersonally -- and his considerable rhetorical skills (despite a disfluency here and there) have only increased over his years in office........

I applaud your honesty, and your intellect. It is rare that you can find someone who can cut through the rhetoric and vitriol, express an opinion of the issues and then state why he does not like the person. You have done well. And in that, you are the most dangerous of liberals. A rational, thinking, and non-hatefilled liberal. If you are not on Kerry's staff, you should be. You will convert more with your sane and logical elucidation of the facts and counterpoints than a 100 Carvels, Begalas, Stephanopolous' or Rathers could ever do.

You will not convince the rabid right, but there is always the swing center.

Thanks for making my day!

The problems on this planet can be boiled down to just two major issues: 1. Run-away greed. 2. Islamic fundamentalist fanaticism. The first is an age old issue but is getting more dangerous every day. Still, something I can deal with on a personal level, I may go with out a job but I would still be alive. The second is a more immediate danger. This ideology preaches that all infidels must be eradicated eventually... starting now! This ideology must be dealt with aggressively, if your a liberal who doesn't have a stomach for this, maybe we could send YOU into negotiate with Osama. An escalation of war is inevitable, better to take it to them than let them bring it to us. I don't like the body count any more than any rational person - but war IS hell. We didn't start their religion OR their war. Bush is by no means the perfect choice, but vote for Kerry? are you living in a cave?

This is why Kerry has to be afraid. And if he is to win, it is tonight or never. He needs to convince CroMag that he can protect us as well as Bush has. If he cans, he gains the initative, if not the election. if he does not, the race is over.

We can't forget that Kerry has spread his umbrella so wide that he has included a lot of these supposedly unintelligent folks in his voting ranks. I heard someone talking about a poll of Kerry supporters that stated 28% of them supported the war in Iraq, and wanted a stronger statement made there.

That's important, because frankly he has positioned himself on a teeter totter. If he insults these voters' stance by insulting Bush's stance, he will lose votes. Insulting his base, though, puts that teeny Nadar vote and No-Shows on election day at risk of being higher than planned.

That's what you get when you try to be everything to everyone. Tonight he is gonna have to be everything to everyone at the same time. I'm interested to see if he can pull it off...

Sorry to disappoint you Dr. Guy but I am not a swing vote. Kerry talks on one side of his face at one moment and the other the next. His attendance in Congress is well documented and after returning from Vietnam, he disgraced his fellow veterans for the sake of popularity and self profit. His "plan" for the economy has been shot down as unworkable and he is in bed with the "Hollywood crowd" ( and we all know what kind of stable rational people these are ). While Bush has many faults, he has proven that he is dedicated to a focused direction. The Commander in Chief cannot be a "waffler" or change direction as the wind blows. An army must move forward or it is in retreat.

As in my personal relationships, I judge a persons character less on what comes out of their mouth and more upon the actions they have committed. You may use your own paradigm to judge someones character at your own peril.

Sorry to disappoint you Dr. Guy but I am not a swing vote.

Perhaps not in actual fact, but your 2 points split the spectrum, and that was what I was alluding to. I understand your position, and agree somewhat. however, the nub of your post is still valid. Security. With 4 children of my own, that is what I care about the most. I think I have seen enough lies and broken promises that I dont care who promises what on taxes and spending. I want the person who will take care of my grandkids when I am gone that I will vote for.

SS will be broke anyway. I am not counting on that, so Kerry can quit with those scare tactics. The CPAs did a better job.

Well, the first point (run-away greed) is not really an issue in the presidential election. That problem permeates our government as a whole: the Presidency, Congress, Supreme Court, State and even Local governments all have a hand in this fiasco.

What can be done? - Nothing.

Nothing that is until the people of this nation rally together and march upon state capitols and in Washington and demand that this country be returned to a government of the people, by the people and for the people and not just a reasonable facsimile there of that favors the rich and powerful and the multi-national corporations over the will and welfare of the people.

Laws currently before Congress as well as planned changes in the patent laws are beginning strangle out individuality and free enterprise by small business.

Make no mistake that, to them we are but cows to be manipulated and milked... and if need be pacified with double speak and the prosecution of a few meaningless scape goats.

It's a situation that cannot be changed by the vote, nor by the act(s) of an individual or small group of individuals, but instead by revolution - or the threat of revolution by the masses.

Until they fear that they may be murdered in their sleep by The People that they are supposed to be representing. And until they uphold the constitution that they have sworn allegiance to instead of paying lip service to it in the name of greed.

Personally, I don't see that happening any time soon so you should plan for the things to get worse.

Got a link for this?

Unfortunately, no.....it's something I read some time ago in Time, Popular Science or some other mag I read. Sorry.

its funny you mentioned engineers, because it so happens that most of my friends are engineers, mechanical engineers to be precise, and everyone of them is pro bush. i had never thought about it before, and while Im not sure your reasoning is accuracte(warm fuzzy liberals), I do see the same result.

I read that Stephen Hawking, the renowned theoretical physicist, used to be a devout atheist...in recent years, however, he has recanted his atheism and is now a devout catholic. He says that the deeper into creation and the nature of the universe he gets, the more he believes in "Intelligent Design".....a Divine Creator. He feels that it's the only real explanation for the existence of everything.

The deeper into creation, or the nearer to his own experience of the opposite? There's a common tendency to start swotting when your final exams are getting close ...

I'm an engineer voting BUSH Doesn't that give ya the warm fuzzies now???