RE: Tea Party and Science

RE: Tea Party and Science (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Nosathro -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 8:22:56 AM)
Was there any mention of which "science" they were talking about? Biology, Sociology, Physics? Or are we saying something like High School Science 101?

mnottertail -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 8:26:26 AM)
Yes there was in the article Kirata linked. a composite from here: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/ Turns out that the rightwingers are pretty ignorant as that article actually pointed out.

Nosathro -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 8:54:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Yes there was in the article Kirata linked. a composite from here: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/ Turns out that the rightwingers are pretty ignorant as that article actually pointed out. It still does not say which if any of the sciences. And a 2000 test population, a bit small. I think this guy is more correct about the error in the study: Instead of a test of factual knowledge about science, use a test of understanding of how and why science works. . Instead of CRT and numeracy - which are also heavily influenced by factual knowledge about (e.g.) algebra - use a measure of actively open-minded thinking (AOT). Even an 8-item measure of beliefs about how thinking should be conducted is quite useful for predicting many things Jon Baron

GotSteel -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 10:03:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie Disputing science is not a bad thing. It is when the dispute comes from a place of ignorance.

Phydeaux -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 10:16:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It really doesn't matter whether teabaggers know more a little more science than the average voter. Or a little less ..... What matters is that the Right, especially the Religious Right, ignores or disputes science far more often. (Climate change and creationism being two cases in point.) Interesting how you conflate the Religious right with the Tea Party.

RacerJim -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 10:23:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie Disputing science is not a bad thing. It is when the dispute comes from a place of ignorance. The place of ignorance is believing in human caused global warming when the fact of the matter is that humans weren't around to end the last ice-age.

mnottertail -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 10:30:54 AM)
I don't even think the nutsackers for all their imbecility believe that humans caused global warming before humans existed. However they existed last ice age. Q.E.D. on the teabaggers and science knowledge I should think.

Yachtie -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 10:34:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I don't even think the nutsackers for all their imbecility believe that humans caused global warming before humans existed. However they existed last ice age. Q.E.D. on the teabaggers and science knowledge I should think. Q.E.D. on not getting the point.

mnottertail -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 10:39:09 AM)
Yeah, I never could get the point of hallucinatory horseshit. I have an intellectual starch-blocker that flares up when moronic shit is spewed in geysers by those who haven't any basic connections to anything that is real and factual. Q.E.D.

joether -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 1:38:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RacerJim quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie Disputing science is not a bad thing. It is when the dispute comes from a place of ignorance. The place of ignorance is believing in human caused global warming when the fact of the matter is that humans weren't around to end the last ice-age. If you really believe that scientists do not take stuff like that into account, then it demonstrates clearly your ignorance on the science. One of the very first questions asked about twenty years ago, was whether the effects of climate change were not simply just the normal 'heat/cooling' cycle the planet has gone through previously. The evidence then and more importantly now, show this is not a normal cycle but something else entirely. Scientists did not come out and just say "oh, its all the humans fault". They had to remove variables from the equation, and test the concept a multitude times over. Its all there in the hundreds of thousands of journals to be had in any decent scientifically accredited college or university. Go have a read.

GotSteel -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 2:13:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It really doesn't matter whether teabaggers know more a little more science than the average voter. Or a little less ..... What matters is that the Right, especially the Religious Right, ignores or disputes science far more often. (Climate change and creationism being two cases in point.) Interesting how you conflate the Religious right with the Tea Party. Um...where did she do that? Also are they two seperate group and if so what's the difference?

Moonhead -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 2:29:07 PM)
Apparently the religious right are there to make the teabaggers look like they understand science... [:D]

Hillwilliam -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 3:12:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It really doesn't matter whether teabaggers know more a little more science than the average voter. Or a little less ..... What matters is that the Right, especially the Religious Right, ignores or disputes science far more often. (Climate change and creationism being two cases in point.) Interesting how you conflate the Religious right with the Tea Party. There is a very significant overlap between the 2 groups.

PeonForHer -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 3:33:51 PM)
FR A Q for those who are informed: Are there any Tea Party atheists?

Owner59 -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 4:05:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail I don't even think the nutsackers for all their imbecility believe that humans caused global warming before humans existed. However they existed last ice age. Q.E.D. on the teabaggers and science knowledge I should think. Q.E.D. on not getting the point. If only the teajadists were as up on math and finance .....[8\|]

PeonForHer -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 4:14:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR A Q for those who are informed: Are there any Tea Party atheists? I'll take that as a 'No', then. My next question: have there been any bears that have disdained to shit in the woods and have instead always trekked to the nearest hotel to defecate in its washroom in a civilised and cultured fashion?

DomKen -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 4:48:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It really doesn't matter whether teabaggers know more a little more science than the average voter. What matters is that the Right, especially the Religious Right, ignores or disputes science far more often. (Climate change and creationism being two cases in point.) Disputing science is not a bad thing. What is a bad thing is accepting science simply because, well, it's science. The Economist author is clearly an idiot or thinks his readers are. How would a scientist somewhere else know to even attempt to replicate a finding unless it was published? The whole point of the publication system is to put out a finding so others can verify it and build upon it. Of course sometimes the initial finding is wrong for some reason and later work proves that.

NoBimbosAllowed -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 8:24:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen The whole point of the publication system is to put out a finding so others can verify it and build upon it. Of course sometimes the initial finding is wrong for some reason and later work proves that. Kinda like both Old and New Testaments.

tweakabelle -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 8:57:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It really doesn't matter whether teabaggers know more a little more science than the average voter. Or a little less ..... What matters is that the Right, especially the Religious Right, ignores or disputes science far more often. (Climate change and creationism being two cases in point.) Interesting how you conflate the Religious right with the Tea Party. Interesting how you ignore the serious point while inventing a wholly contrived point to masquerade as a response Should your silence on my assertion that the Right, and especially the Religious Right ignores science far more often than those to their left, be interpreted as agreement with my assertion?

NoBimbosAllowed -> RE: Tea Party and Science (10/18/2013 9:11:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Interesting how you conflate the Religious right with the Tea Party. Interesting how you ignore the serious point while inventing a wholly contrived point to masquerade as a response Kinda like Ian MacDonald "conflated things", or Peter Slipper conflated trips to wine fueled fun with rightful uses of taxpayer funded taxi-vouchers? Peter Slipper is/was an atheist beloved of the lefty Oz Sydneyite voting demographic blocks, correct? Maybe Mr Atheist Slipper could have done well to have some Faith in basic arithmatic instead of betting on faulty Chaos Thory that led to him being completely caught out and farting egg-omelette on every wannabe Clover Moore's face.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625