3rdnlng Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Jim Hansen. Those aren't soft terms, and I've heard it plenty of times. But hey, thanks for making my point for me. Again. In ways you can't even begin to understand. Again. Jim Henson. Wasn't he your creator? Ooops, wrong spelling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Jim Henson. Wasn't he your creator? Ooops, wrong spelling. I would PAY, cash, to provide you a brain transplant if it helped you recognize the difference between "funny" and "lame". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted April 18, 2012 Author Share Posted April 18, 2012 Jim Hansen. Those aren't soft terms, and I've heard it plenty of times. But hey, thanks for making my point for me. Again. In ways you can't even begin to understand. Again. is that a direct quote from him or are you speaking for him? if he truly felt "the discussion is over" wouldn't he have stopped ater devising "model A" for climate change rather than publishing several more including "model E"? few scientists believe "the discussion is over" on anything. questioning conventional wisdom is at the very core of good science. regarding your second point, we obviously and thankfully don't run in the same crowds. guess i've missed these types of comments being highlighted as conservative naysayers best arguments but it doesn't surprise me. what i've generally heard is what i described. and your attempt at claiming superiority based on claiming superiority is just annoying and only lessens your already weak argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 You're pining for more Barry Sucks/I agree content? No. I what to know what the point of this thread is. That we are falling behind the world in science because some school in Kansas wants intelligent design taught? That skepticism that global warming is man made can only spring from a political motive? What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I would PAY, cash, to provide you a brain transplant if it helped you recognize the difference between "funny" and "lame". Well, you can't accuse him of Intelligent Design though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 (edited) Whats the amount of time it would take this piece of **** hypocrite to call me a 'racist' or an 'intolerant bigot' if I posted something similar in ghetto tone ebonics? Whatchu talkin bout, cracka? Muh dik. Edited April 18, 2012 by LeviF91 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted April 18, 2012 Author Share Posted April 18, 2012 No. I what to know what the point of this thread is. That we are falling behind the world in science because some school in Kansas wants intelligent design taught? That skepticism that global warming is man made can only spring from a political motive? What? neither. that the majority of criticism, disdain or disregard for "controversial" scientific findings such as those discussed in the article, by politicians, is done by conservatives. i am soliciting opinions on agreement/disagreement with this point and theories as to why that might be so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 No. I what to know what the point of this thread is. That we are falling behind the world in science because some school in Kansas wants intelligent design taught? That skepticism that global warming is man made can only spring from a political motive? What? It's about the fact that many people in this country disregard good science based on political or religious ideology. This willing ignorance embodies the low value we place on critical thought and fact-based skepticism. Most Americans only look deep enough to find evidence which supports their preconceived ideological world view and then plug their ears, close their eyes and scream really loudly until the bad contradictory stuff goes away. We're all guilty of this to some degree, but from what I've seen so far, the bigger your ego the more susceptible you might be. The sad part is, if you don't learn to think critically by a certain point in your life, you risk becoming set in your ways and incapable of change. Then the real point becomes: which parts of this mentality do we want to pass along to the next generation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted April 18, 2012 Author Share Posted April 18, 2012 It's about the fact that many people in this country disregard good science based on political or religious ideology. This willing ignorance embodies the low value we place on critical thought and fact-based skepticism. Most Americans only look deep enough to find evidence which supports their preconceived ideological world view and then plug their ears, close their eyes and scream really loudly until the bad contradictory stuff goes away. We're all guilty of this to some degree, but from what I've seen so far, the bigger your ego the more susceptible you might be. The sad part is, if you don't learn to think critically by a certain point in your life, you risk becoming set in your ways and incapable of change. Then the real point becomes: which parts of this mentality do we want to pass along to the next generation? that too. well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 It's about the fact that many people in this country disregard good science based on political or religious ideology. This willing ignorance embodies the low value we place on critical thought and fact-based skepticism. Most Americans only look deep enough to find evidence which supports their preconceived ideological world view and then plug their ears, close their eyes and scream really loudly until the bad contradictory stuff goes away. We're all guilty of this to some degree, but from what I've seen so far, the bigger your ego the more susceptible you might be. The sad part is, if you don't learn to think critically by a certain point in your life, you risk becoming set in your ways and incapable of change. Then the real point becomes: which parts of this mentality do we want to pass along to the next generation? Many believe that if there ever was any solid basis for man-made global warming the science has been taken over by the leftist politicians in order to force their political views on the world. Could there be man-made global warming? Certainly. Could there not be man-made global warming? Certainly. It definately hasn't been proven enough to start some silly ass cap & trade program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 There are a few things this thread is missing. One of them is Dellapelle John. WE WANT DELLAPELLE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 (edited) Many believe that if there ever was any solid basis for man-made global warming the science has been taken over by the leftist politicians in order to force their political views on the world. Could there be man-made global warming? Certainly. Could there not be man-made global warming? Certainly. It definately hasn't been proven enough to start some silly ass cap & trade program. Why does everyone want to put all of the focus on global warming? I personally think that the science still seems to be out on that to SOME degree, so you're not necessarily a complete whack job if you express some skepticism about it. However, it represents only one example of many of what's being illustrated here. I guess it does have the unique distinction of apparently being the only one that any conservative here feels they have a chance of defending without looking like a giant douche. Edited April 18, 2012 by Gene Frenkle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 (edited) Why does everyone want to put all of the focus on global warming? I personally think that the science still seems to be out on that to SOME degree, so you're not necessarily a complete whack job if you express some skepticism about it. However, it represents only one example of many of what's being illustrated here. I guess it does have the unique distinction of apparently being the only one that any conservative here feels they have a chance of defending without looking like a giant douche. I actually thought that was the subject of the original article. I'd apologize for my poor recollection...but it's a sign of weakness. In truth, it's your fault. !@#$. Edit: And by the way... I personally think that the science still seems to be out on that to SOME degree, The "science" is "always out" on ANY science. Recall the whole superluminal neutrino thing recently? Where everyone said "bull ****!" and checked it out anyway? That's science. Saying "It's proven fact" or (FAR worse) "There's a consensus"...not science. Edited April 18, 2012 by DC Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 you meaning like buying a 400K home on and interest only loan with a 30K job is a bad idea? That kind of knowledge would be useless Yeah, that stuff. Maybe Levi Frenkle can explain why we pay 5,000 people to work at the Federal Dept of Education if Washington has nothing to do with education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Yeah, that stuff. Maybe Levi Frenkle can explain why we pay 5,000 people to work at the Federal Dept of Education if Washington has nothing to do with education. Muh dik? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Muh dik? Baby, my cash money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 I find claiming man made global warming absolute truth a far more political stand then being skeptical of it, because belief means you must support political action. Carbon credits. gov subsidized electric cars. No more coal. And so on. Saying lets not panic yet it's just a THEORY is actually more level headed. A handful of politicians mentioning ID means nothing. No one is banning the teaching of evolution. Did any one think, when asked about quantum physics, Einsteins statement "God does not roll dice" he was proposing banning the study of it on religious grounds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 The "science" is "always out" on ANY science. Recall the whole superluminal neutrino thing recently? Where everyone said "bull ****!" and checked it out anyway? That's science. Saying "It's proven fact" or (FAR worse) "There's a consensus"...not science. Thanks, Dr. Cooper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 Yeah, that stuff. Maybe Levi Frenkle can explain why we pay 5,000 people to work at the Federal Dept of Education if Washington has nothing to do with education. Public school curriculum is defined at a state level. I'd imagine that the Federal Dept of Education exists to support the state education programs. Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning? I find claiming man made global warming absolute truth a far more political stand then being skeptical of it, because belief means you must support political action. Carbon credits. gov subsidized electric cars. No more coal. And so on. Saying lets not panic yet it's just a THEORY is actually more level headed. A handful of politicians mentioning ID means nothing. No one is banning the teaching of evolution. Did any one think, when asked about quantum physics, Einsteins statement "God does not roll dice" he was proposing banning the study of it on religious grounds? Again with the global warming rant...lol The rest is retarded in many ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 18, 2012 Share Posted April 18, 2012 (edited) Yeah, that stuff. Maybe Levi Frenkle can explain why we pay 5,000 people to work at the Federal Dept of Education if Washington has nothing to do with education. I believe he said they have nothing to do with setting curriculum or textbook standards, which is correct. I'd imagine that the Federal Dept of Education exists to support the state education programs. Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning? Generally, the Department of Education serves two functions: student loans, and funneling federal money back to the states. And most of the rest is giving money to Hawaiians (FOUR different programs promoting education in Hawaii that I've found so far.) And a program on rehabilitation of people with disabilities (not "learning disabilities". Any disabilities). Why that would be under Education is beyond me... Edited April 18, 2012 by DC Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts