Is Science Caught in the Middle?

[Robert Williams]

"Experience"

Originally Posted by biggestsquid    Asking a left wing weenie about proper temp is like asking them about proper tax rate. Do you expect an answer?

 

  Sorry, but this is an example of the experience that is found here (I'm not singling you out).

 

I guess I should give credit where credit is due.  You guys are animals--no, not that you pack like wolves; but in the times one might leave a dump, and keep on walking.  

 

"You guys"? Your utter lack of self awareness is comical.

[inthered]

Moving right along ...

Originally Posted by Robert Williams    "You guys"? Your utter lack of self awareness is comical.

    

[dena]

"Experience"

   Asking a left wing weenie about proper temp is like asking them about proper tax rate. Do you expect an answer?

 

  Sorry, but this is an example of the experience that is found here (I'm not singling you out).

 

I guess I should give credit where credit is due.  You guys are animals--no, not that you pack like wolves; but in the times one might leave a dump, and keep on walking.  

 

So, what is the right temperature?

You know all the answers, and you are a smart guy.

What, climate wise, are we trying to accomplish?

Do we want it colder, with shorter growing seasons for a growing world population?

[longcaster]

So, what is the right temperature?

You know all the answers, and you are a smart guy.

What, climate wise, are we trying to accomplish?

Do we want it colder, with shorter growing seasons for a growing world population?

 

 

You have to know asking him questions like that can't be answered. Facts are not tangible to a liberal. If you want answers from a liberal, ask them questions that can't be answered, they can spew for hours on those.

[inthered]

   Huh, huh. So what is it, huh?  Tell me what it is.  Huh? What is it huh what, huh--huh?    There is one?     

 

Isn't asking such a question just the dragging of yet another Red Herring through yet another thread?    

 

Anyway, this has led me to decided upon a new signature line, below.  

[Robert Williams]

   Huh, huh. So what is it, huh?  Tell me what it is.  Huh? What is it huh what, huh--huh?    There is one?     

 

Isn't asking such a question just the dragging of yet another Red Herring through yet another thread?    

 

Anyway, this has led me to decided upon a new signature line, below.  

 

Red herring? If you don't know what is "right" how the hell can you figure you know what, if anything, is wrong? You're like the spas kid in school that flunks every class and calls everyone else stupid.

[dena]

So, what is the right temperature?

You know all the answers, and you are a smart guy.

What, climate wise, are we trying to accomplish?

Do we want it colder, with shorter growing seasons for a growing world population?

 

 

You have to know asking him questions like that can't be answered. Facts are not tangible to a liberal. If you want answers from a liberal, ask them questions that can't be answered, they can spew for hours on those.

 

yer right, it is my fault.

I trouble shoot in a strange way, I guess.

I like to define the problem before I go about trying to fix it.

If not, I could be fixing the wrong thing. that, while good practice, is a waste of time.

[inthered]

   "Who are those guys?  They're good."

Originally Posted by Robert Williams    Red herring? If you don't know what is "right" how the hell can you figure you know what, if anything, is wrong? You're like the spas kid in school that flunks every class and calls everyone else stupid.

Originally Posted by dena   

yer right, it is my fault.

I trouble shoot in a strange way, I guess.

I like to define the problem before I go about trying to fix it.

If not, I could be fixing the wrong thing. that, while good practice, is a waste of time.

 

In an earlier post, I came right out and said

Originally Posted by inthered  No, it Was about various views of science.  I had hoped the “topic” might have been examined. However, while climate change maybe the first biggest controversy to come to mind, the mere mention of it unfortunately is as throwing down the gauntlet. I could, but I won't provide another sought for springboard from which to jump to anything off topic. No, the Koch brothers aren’t about science (imho). One might Google them.

This was in response to a request for a reference of where I got the got the figure of $67,042,064 in funding, by the Koch brothers, to groups denying climate change science.

 

RW, I guess you missed my remark about "spring-boarding" to diverse other aspects.  You sir are a winner:

 

dena, at least you are not claiming that there is no problem (I think)—if you are asking what the extent of it is.  Waiting until something breaks to gain the certainty often times is the discovery of, "that's it and this is bad."   It's not uncertainty that is foolish; it is the certainty that everything can be dismissed with self-approved wisdom.

 

Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.  ~ Voltaire

[epanzella]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nipsip 

Hey just look who's in the Whitehouse for the second time after screwing it up the first time. You could convince these morons the world is only ten years old.

[MDC]

I personally like 75.5 degrees F. It's a nice comfy temp. Not too hot, and not too cold

 

What's your favorite temperature?

 

[dena]

   "Who are those guys?  They're good."

   Red herring? If you don't know what is "right" how the hell can you figure you know what, if anything, is wrong? You're like the spas kid in school that flunks every class and calls everyone else stupid.

  

 

yer right, it is my fault.

 

I trouble shoot in a strange way, I guess.

 

I like to define the problem before I go about trying to fix it.

 

If not, I could be fixing the wrong thing. that, while good practice, is a waste of time.

 

In an earlier post, I came right out and said

 No, it Was about various views of science.  I had hoped the “topic” might have been examined. However, while climate change maybe the first biggest controversy to come to mind, the mere mention of it unfortunately is as throwing down the gauntlet. I could, but I won't provide another sought for springboard from which to jump to anything off topic. No, the Koch brothers aren’t about science (imho). One might Google them.

This was in response to a request for a reference of where I got the got the figure of $67,042,064 in funding, by the Koch brothers, to groups denying climate change science.

 

RW, I guess you missed my remark about "spring-boarding" to diverse other aspects.  You sir are a winner:

 

dena, at least you are not claiming that there is no problem (I think)—

if you are asking what the extent of it is.  Waiting until something breaks to gain the certainty often times is the discovery of, "that's it and this is bad."   It's not uncertainty that is foolish; it is the certainty that everything can be dismissed with self-approved wisdom.

 

Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.  ~ Voltaire

 

What are you trying to say?

Have you figured out the correct temperature yet?

[dena]

I personally like 75.5 degrees F. It's a nice comfy temp. Not too hot, and not too cold

 

What's your favorite temperature?

 

 

That right there is the most convincing argument I have seen yet.

[MDC]

That right there is the most convincing argument I have seen yet.

 

I'm thinking global warming ain't so bad

[dena]

I am all for it.

I want Tarpon, and Snook in the Chesapeake Bay....

[BrianBM]

Actually, guys, this thread was not about global warming. Look at the OP's original post. Republican/right-wing hostility to scientific education is hardly limited to global warming. The thread was drifted towards global warming to avoid discussion of evolution. The scientific community has accepted evolution as a fact for more than a century, a scientific consensus so long that Republicans are increasingly aware of it, as they drift into the 19th century. The scientific consensus that current warming trends are man-made is only a decade old, so naturally the GOP is barely aware of it, and dislikes what it thinks it knows.

 

I did omit another display of ideological hostility to rationality that's dear to Republican hearts. Did you know that women can't get pregnant from being raped? Their bodies reject the sperm. That's why there is no issue about the victims of rape needing access to abortion; it doesn't happen.

 

For that matter, is there no Republican here who will stand up and defend the Biblical account that the Earth is stationary, and the Sun revolves around it? Just because Issac Newton says otherwise, are we so quick to dismiss the Bible? And Newton was a government employee, too, so how can we trust him? :p