The contents of the rest of the page generates lots of questions and continually proposed that electricity is just a fluke and there’s no understanding of how or why. But the article was written by either an idiot or a liar because the reasons are known. Nuclear reactors are purpose built to make electricity. It’s safe to say that the vast amount of electricity on the planet at any given time is manmade and deliberate.
The formatting of the page is familiar to all of us because it’s a common layout: ask questions, intrigue the reader, then show how a thing works to answer those questions. The Bible verse at the end is the button line that connects it all - it’s the thing that’s standing up the whole line that the page is describing. Electricity is simple and understandable but this textbook makes it out to be magic and then finishes the page by talking about a time when skydaddy make magic too.
The entire thing is disingenuous and if you aren’t able to see that then you are either trying to sell people on sky daddy or you don’t know how page educational literature works.
You are, however, currently standing several levels of seriousness too deep inside a shitpost-quarry.
Oh… and please try to avoid doing this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
…as opposed to the book, which teaches the lesson of being content with lukewarm non-explanations, vague and misleading descriptions, objectively false statements framed as controversial debate, and promoting ignorance as universally encouraged value by swiftly declaring there is nothing else to know, thus dodging the question and going for a distraction with a contextually completely unhelpful bible quote.
And your apology is wholeheartedly rejected, because I know it is standard practise of religious rhetoric to quickly apologize when called out, but learning absolutely nothing in the process and keeping up the assault on rational thought under a veil of “open discussion” with disingenuous questioning, argumentative foulplay and all the other kinds of fallacys, formal and informal.
TLDR: You are the one in dire need of doing some questioning of beliefs.
The contents of the rest of the page generates lots of questions and continually proposed that electricity is just a fluke and there’s no understanding of how or why. But the article was written by either an idiot or a liar because the reasons are known. Nuclear reactors are purpose built to make electricity. It’s safe to say that the vast amount of electricity on the planet at any given time is manmade and deliberate.
The formatting of the page is familiar to all of us because it’s a common layout: ask questions, intrigue the reader, then show how a thing works to answer those questions. The Bible verse at the end is the button line that connects it all - it’s the thing that’s standing up the whole line that the page is describing. Electricity is simple and understandable but this textbook makes it out to be magic and then finishes the page by talking about a time when skydaddy make magic too.
The entire thing is disingenuous and if you aren’t able to see that then you are either trying to sell people on sky daddy or you don’t know how page educational literature works.
deleted by creator
You’re just proposing the God of the Gaps, and that god keeps shrinking every day.
deleted by creator
You are, however, currently standing several levels of seriousness too deep inside a shitpost-quarry. Oh… and please try to avoid doing this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
deleted by creator
…as opposed to the book, which teaches the lesson of being content with lukewarm non-explanations, vague and misleading descriptions, objectively false statements framed as controversial debate, and promoting ignorance as universally encouraged value by swiftly declaring there is nothing else to know, thus dodging the question and going for a distraction with a contextually completely unhelpful bible quote.
And your apology is wholeheartedly rejected, because I know it is standard practise of religious rhetoric to quickly apologize when called out, but learning absolutely nothing in the process and keeping up the assault on rational thought under a veil of “open discussion” with disingenuous questioning, argumentative foulplay and all the other kinds of fallacys, formal and informal.
TLDR: You are the one in dire need of doing some questioning of beliefs.