2012-08-16, 20:02 | Link #22921 | |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Quote:
What f'ing idiots. May a flock of people who understand science descend on their web sites.
__________________
|
|
2012-08-16, 20:24 | Link #22924 |
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 35
|
I'm not sure if Engineers would be an improvement. A lot of Engineers are behind all kinds of kookey theories.
And of course, which country, in all it's corrupt dictatorial glory, is run by Engineers? China. |
2012-08-16, 20:28 | Link #22925 | ||
Not Enough Sleep
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: R'lyeh
Age: 48
|
Quote:
Quote:
i will be your campaign manager. i will bury your opponent under so much dirt he would think someone threw him into a waste dump.
__________________
|
||
2012-08-16, 20:30 | Link #22926 | |
Love Yourself
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 38
|
Quote:
Which isn't to say that scientists can't get into office, but a lot is stacked against them. And is it really worth it? You get into office and then have to work with a bunch of stubborn fools who glorify their own ignorance. That must be incredibly frustrating. But if anyone ever wants to start a party based around critical thinking and scientific principles, I'd join.
__________________
|
|
2012-08-16, 23:16 | Link #22928 |
Moving in circles
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Singapore
Age: 49
|
So? What's wrong with setting up a mission/vision statement for the nation? It won't hurt as long as it is read in good faith and it's not as though many people would take it seriously anyway. (How many people actually read mission/vision statements? Yet business leaders craft them all the time.)
That is bad. It may not seem crucial, but the ability to connect well with people is one of the key requirements of being a credible political leader. Otherwise, we'd all be happy to be run by a government of technocrats, which is arguably ideal, but probably not so pleasant. There'd be no room for compromise; follow the plan (because we know what's good for you), or else. |
2012-08-17, 01:41 | Link #22932 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
More like something has been taught more or less one way for thousands of years. Do you really expect people to change so quickly (relatively speaking)?
Most creationist or others that do not support evolution do so because the evidance they would accept does not exist. Namely the intermediate species between one species and another. Evidance of the transitions form when one species becomes another species. It is something I don't recall any scientist being able to provide. Because otherwise, those that do not support evolution consider all these other species seperate creations that lived and died, with no real relation to other species. The main one is that most in these grouping have the most abolute detest for the idea the humans came from apes (yet there are still apes most would say, but none of the other humanoid species survived). Absolutely detest that idea. There also tends to be a bit of species-ism. Humans are special (god X must have a plan for it or something), thus they must have been made special, not from some dumb ape or chimp. That tends to be another point of contention. Some will debate dinosaurs, but most don't anymore. If it comes up they might ignore it. I don't know how many stick to the "young Earth" notions of creation within the last say 10,000 year verse the billions specualted today. Some it isn't a lack of education. It is a overabundance of faith. They might have learned all about evolution and the theories of the age of the world and many other thing. They simply reject it as either fiction, or it does not suit their beliefs because of course "how can god be wrong?" (a religious scientist would say, it isn't a matter of god being wrong, it is a matter of the relatively ignorant priests who wrote stuff down being wrong). In some cases if you read into the text of the Bible orthe Torah, you can piece together some surprisingly advanced scientific knowledge...that is watered down for the masses. Or transcribed or translated so many times that the details are not clear anymore. Or in Genesis, by the time the stories were written down, too much of the original narration was lost. Details were blurred, and events exaggerated. (The Great Flood is a tale that exists in some form in many of the ancient societies. However it is also true that nearly all major societies started arounf giant rivers. Rivers that flood. That or it was a tale from the end of the Ice Age...when the ice melted the Oceans returned flooding any coastal villages and cities that might have existed. Some ahve the tale as civilization existing before th flood, and then reviving after the flood...but a few have the flood as the beginning of all things. It is a potentially interesting study that I'm sure has already been done).
__________________
|
2012-08-17, 02:27 | Link #22933 | |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Her line is, "I'm not a nice person. Diplomacy is for wusses."
Alternative: "I *AM* thinking nice thoughts... you really don't want to see the other ones." Quote:
It is just that the average creationist hasn't done any homework at all and is, bluntly, too lazy/scared/adamant to even examine the evidence.
__________________
|
|
2012-08-17, 08:02 | Link #22935 | |
AS Oji-kun
Join Date: Nov 2006
Age: 74
|
Quote:
I'm not sure I understand how you can use the word "speculated" to describe measurements of the age of the earth. Wikipedia reports scientific estimates of the age of the earth at 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years based on careful radiometric dating. A lot of Ron Paul's supporters come from the ranks of scientists and engineers; I don't see that as an endorsement of their fitness to govern.
__________________
|
|
2012-08-17, 08:29 | Link #22936 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
|
Quote:
I do think politics could benefit from a wider pool of different backgrounds like scientists and engineers. Law, political science and business currently dominate the political scene which creates a too narrow field of expertise. Widening the base can remove some of the blind spots. Politicians often look completely out of their depth when complex issues in regard to technology or economics are involved. |
|
2012-08-17, 08:38 | Link #22937 | |
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 35
|
Quote:
The communists are basically acting as a vast religion: 1. They set up (terrible)movies to idolise their former leaders as messianic figures. 2. They try to dictate morality to their citizens. The morality championed by Hu Jintao is not particularly objectionable, but I think the fact that he's trying to dictate morality to his citizens (Also by blocking access to materials the party deems "destructive of the country's morals") is no different from Christians in the US government trying to ban abortion or same sex marriage, if anything it's worse, as those Christian elements are not nearly so total in their influence, they can't ban anything they don't like the look of. Just because you have a technical background doesn't mean you're immune from pushing your beliefs on other people, and that's what the real problem with creationists and Christian fundamentalists. I could accept their opinions being wrong and irrational, it's that they try to push them on everyone else that's the problem. |
|
2012-08-17, 09:12 | Link #22938 | |
廉頗
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Massachusetts
Age: 34
|
Quote:
Look especially at the subject of human evolution for prescient examples. To tie this in to the news thread, this was published earlier this week: More Evidence Found Indicating that Homo Rudolfensis coexisted as a separate species with Homo Erectus Fascinates me to think of more than one species human running around the world. |
|
2012-08-17, 11:49 | Link #22939 | ||
Le fou, c'est moi
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 34
|
Quote:
If anything they've had it better under engineers. The brilliant political thinker Mao had no qualms throwing the entire nation into total anarchy if that's what it takes for him to keep on going. What's a Cultural Revolution or two compared to Mao? However, Hu Jintao's policy is actually a reaction to the growing internal criticism of the perceived technocratic indifference to the many social problems plaguing China. It's a return to Confucian notions of the moral, harmonious patriarchal leadership, the resurgence of which has been continuing since the Maoist ideology began to lose its grip. It hasn't translated into actual on the ground results, unsurprisingly, but expect the Party to step up this propagandistic angle dramatically once the Chinese economic boom slows and the promise of a better tomorrow begins to ring hollow for the masses. There's nothing particularly Maoist or technocratic about the relatively recent dramatic rise in Chinese nationalism, for example, yet the CPC taps eagerly into this undirected outburst of enthusiasm to keep itself on the right side of the People. The communist "religion" accusation rang true during the heydays of Maoism, but if anything the current CPC is an enemy of it. Bo Xilai was such a dangerous existential threat to the CPC leadership partly because he was a populist leader who claimed the banner of a new Maoism. Quote:
|
||
2012-08-17, 14:10 | Link #22940 |
Takao Tsundere Cruiser
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Classified
|
Meanwhile in Russia....
Pussy Riot members jailed for two years for hooliganism Why am i not surprise? Gay parades banned in Moscow for 100 years Banning it won't stop it. People will still go on pride parades no matter what obstacles they face.
__________________
|
Tags |
current affairs, discussion, international |
Thread Tools | |
|
|