Tim K. wrote:

What's the take-home message?  Self-professed
math/physics/business/statistical "experts" should keep their fucking noses
out of a subject they don't understand (unless they become students of that
subject, then more power to 'em).  That keeps the real biologists from
having to go in and clean the mess up behind them.  "Soft science" indeed.
 

None of that sifting and winnowing for you, eh? Science by decree.

http://www.av8n.com/physics/scientific-methods.htm

http://www.av8n.com/physics/authority.htm

And yes I do sorta have this Elifritz idiot in mind.  Take a look at his
website - I tremble at the thought of some science student using his
discharge as a "source" on a report and writing about how "optical photons"
supply all the energy used by life on earth, etc.
 

Just most of it. There is also the radioactive decay of nuclides synthesized within stars, tidal energy left over from the accretion process as a result of exploding stars, etc., ultimately it's gravitational energy. Beyond that, we just don't know.

http://www.mala.bc.ca/~earles/oct01b1999.htm

None of that 'conservation of energy' for you, eh? Unless you are using geothermal energy, it's the photons that make it all work.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net