Nice analogy. However, I'm not sure what you are expecting me to say to it as it seems to support my complaint. My complaint is that it is not a fact that we know about the world which we do not live in.

For example, measuring the train's increased speed, one could erroneously conclude a very high speed when it hits Seattle and issue warnings for all to evacuate the town. Likewise, one would conclude it must have hardly been moving for decades since it left Miami. Nothing about it's current rate would give evidence of any previous rates, how the current speed compares with past speeds, whether it is faster or slower than past speeds, nor if it has ever been in Miami. It could have been a train newly placed in service at Denver. A newly transfered operator, from Miami, may have incorrectly posted the message. (Ideas from "Great Lateral Thinking Puzzles")

So, no, there are no facts other than the current speed, rate of increase, and direction you can determine from it. The rest are conclusions/speculations which may or may not be true.

It's not "blanks" in past climate data -- the front 97% is completely missing. And politicians are evacuating Seattle, bulldozing homes, to make way for a train crash which isn't going to occur.

So you do acknowledge the current facts, and that they can be used to determine the direction the train is going.

From my perspective, the "historical facts" may be somewhat irrelevant to the current ones for a couple of reasons.

First, the train may have gone over mountains before. The train may even have picked up excessive speed before. That would indicate that such is likely again. However, just because we do not have this data does not make it any less fact-based to recognize the current trend. In fact, the "unknown" portion of the data you suggest is required must necessarily have a neutral effect on current observations. One cannot claim an area of ignorance to be either for or against known data.

Second, the train may have gone over a lot of terrain and always before managed to recover itself upon reaching excessive speeds. In some places, this may have been because it reached the valley only to have another hill to climb which helped it safely dissipate that excess speed. (For our climate, something like a large volcanic eruption which puts ash high into our atmosphere, reflecting radiant energy of the sun, might be the equivalent.) However, upon reaching the final slope, the brakes may be ailing and there are no further uphill slopes ahead. (Unless perhaps those politicians are active enough to bulldoze up a mountain out of a molehill.) Would not the residents of Seattle be well-advised to see what they could to to help slow the train?

From my perspective, 97% of unknown has a completely neutral effect on the 3% of known data--for it can neither establish, nor undermine the current facts. In fact, to base one's agnosticism of facts upon ignorance is...well, let me ask you this: how soon do you expect to know everything? If unknown/unestablished data remove the validity of "known" data, what can you ever hope to know?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Actually, depending on current acceleration, velocity, and position, it might have been going backwards when it left Miami.

Current conditions tell us nothing about past or future conditions unless a mechanism can be determined that allows for reasonable extrapolation. But then, scientists today have wonderful imaginations at their disposal in order to support current dogma (see cosmological inflation).

Mike,

In the end I think most people have one worldview, which would then have to include both their views on science and God. The way you put it, "Nature is not self-acting. It depends on God to function and operate. "Nothing happens without His permission."" would imply to me that your view of science is that it is unreliable. Why? Because when it comes down to it, there is nothing to matter that would cause the apple to fall to the ground, there is nothing to the airplane wing nor to the birds wings that would cause it to fly, there is nothing to the ship that would cause it to float and so on. Apples fall because God for the time being wants it that way, birds and planes fly because it for the time being happens to fit into Gods plans, and boats float... etc.

This is certainly one way you can view the world, but it is highly unlikely that any technological breakthroughs would have happened had it been the prevailing point of view for the last 6-7000 years of human civilization.

And who gave people this gift of imagination? Could a creationist debunk an idea on soley the fact that Godgiven imagination was involved?

There are many things science does not yet understand. For example, the search is still on to find the Higgs Boson, which gives some particles mass, while other particles, such as photons, do not have mass. Current theory says that there is a Higgs Field (the "partner" of the Higgs Boson) that permeates everything and gives matter its properties.

In short, particle physicists today believe that there is an all-pervading "something" that makes some things heavy - making them gravitationally attractive - and others light - allowing them to travel at the universal speed limit. This "something" has been called the "God particle" by some.

There is no problem to involve imagination. If it wasn't for imagination, Kekulé might not have been the first to correctly describe the structure of Benzene. At the very least, we wouldn't have such an interesting story to tell young chemists.

However, if all one has to offer is imagination, without accompanying evidence, then it is as much a day-dream as it is a theory. When Kekulé proposed his structure for Benzene, it had the advantage of being able to explain observed phenomena.

I'm not saying the forces of nature, as regulated by God, are not predictable. Scientists have accurately drawn conclusions based on it. But predicting the weather is still largely guesswork. There are too many variables and unknowns to pin it down accurately. This also applies to the theory of "global warming". To suggest it accounts for all the weather anomalies observed in nature is bold at best and worthless at worst. No, I'm not totally discounting it. But neither am I touting it as the only answer. As I have said before, I believe the active role of God and angels accounts for everything. Again, nature is not self-acting. It depends on God to behave how it does. He either commands holy angels or permits evil angels to manipulate the forces of nature to cause death and destruction. He leaves nothing to fate, chance, or mother nature. He alone is in charge and in command. As such, God is not dependent on us to pollute and pervert nature before He can command His angels to pour out the seven last plagues.

What if the weather anomalies are seen as the nuts and bolts of global warming rather than as individual situations that need to be explained by a global warming theory?
To try an example, smoke is not an air anomaly explainable by the theory of fire. Smoke is so much a part of fire that we say "no smoke without a fire".

You are of course right that there is yet lots and lots of things that we are unaware of in regard to how this works, but we are learning new things about it all the time. Can we ever explain it fully? Who knows? Will we be able to give a satisfactory explanation. Most likely.

Are not the seven last plagues like the ones brought on Egypt in the time of Moses more or less outside normal behaviour?

Yes, the seven last plagues will similar to the plagues of Egypt, only worse, a lot worse. "The plagues upon Egypt when God was about to deliver Israel, were similar in character to those more terrible and extensive judgments which are to fall upon the world just before the final deliverance of God's people. {LDE 244.1} "The Lord God of Israel is to execute judgment upon the gods of this world as upon the gods of Egypt. With fire and flood, plagues and earthquakes, He will spoil the whole land. {LDE 240.2}

As with the Egyptian plagues, the seven last plagues will come suddenly and unexpectedly. Scientists will not cry, "We told you so." Instead, just prior to the out pouring of the plagues, they will be declaring, "Peace and safety."