Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Cosmic Variance)   Twenty-four year old Bush campaign worker with no science background gets rewarded with appointment to NASA, tries to promote intelligent design, discount the Big Bang on NASA's web page. Hilarity ensues   (cosmicvariance.com ) divider line
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

43042 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Feb 2006 at 1:32 PM (10 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



531 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2006-02-05 07:43:01 PM  
You know, one thing just occurred to me. Dr Hansen and his minions in the NASA lab -- after spending all our taxpayer dollars to make the "moon landing" -- had all that equipment left over and decided to use it to make Brokeback Mountain.

(that was for blackmenace)

You're wrong on your description of me, but that's ok. I didn't want to let you down.

"With the possible exception of another world war, a giant asteroid, or an incurable plague, global warming may be the single largest threat to our planet." (as linked earlier)
 
2006-02-05 07:51:04 PM  
triphopping_man: My bet is that anyone who'd try this bullshiat in the PRC would end up on the working end of a police baton.

My bet is that evolutionists would like to bring that teaching technique to America.
 
2006-02-05 07:52:49 PM  
YourSurrogateGod: The sooner we privatise NASA the better.

yes because it worked so well with.... ahh fark it, it hasnt worked at all!!
 
2006-02-05 08:08:57 PM  
Taxcheat
You know, one thing just occurred to me. Dr Hansen and his minions in the NASA lab -- after spending all our taxpayer dollars to make the "moon landing" -- had all that equipment left over and decided to use it to make Brokeback Mountain.

Buhhh??

Oh wait, you had no cred to begin with. Moving on.
 
2006-02-05 08:09:01 PM  
SkinnyHead

Do you like getting trounced in these threads? You keep coming back, over and over, with the same old, tired rhetoric. Trying to win Bevets's title? Not likely.
 
2006-02-05 08:10:42 PM  
eraser8

That was a very good article with a lot of good information to help frame the battle in a way that no one else has before.

I have to wonder how people who claim to be morally superior to others lie so boldly:

Before the class, Crocker had told me that she was going to teach "the strengths and weaknesses of evolution." Afterward, I asked her whether she was going to discuss the evidence for evolution in another class. She said no.
 
2006-02-05 08:13:07 PM  
My bet is that evolutionists would like to bring that teaching technique to America.

"Evolutionists". As if evolution is a belief system, as opposed to a theory backed by evidence and research, developed from observations about the world around us. You either "believe" in evolution, or you "believe" in $INSERT_RELIGIOUS_DOGMA_HERE; there is no middle ground, you're either with us, or with the secular humanist t'rr'r'sts.

What a pile of bunkum.

I become ever more frustrated with the opposition to intellect and critical thinking displayed by people with power, and people who support those with power, on a daily basis.

The Pythagoreans considered revealing the existence of the dodecahedron--a friggin' geometrical figure--a capital crime. That's irrational. Denying the probability (near certainty?) that lifeforms change over time because it may threaten one's belief in the literal truth of a poorly-translated text is just as irrational.

*sigh*
 
2006-02-05 08:14:11 PM  
SkinnyHead: My bet is that evolutionists would like to bring that teaching technique to America.

That or throw the farkers out the country for being such morans.
 
2006-02-05 08:17:40 PM  
pontechango way up north in this thread - did a fine job of explaining the concept of theory. Damn shame the fundie 'tards who he/she is trying to reach 'n' teach can't read well enough to understand it.
 
2006-02-05 08:19:44 PM  
You know. I've tried to find the bright side in the various things this administration has done. But dammit, in the past few weeks they've been making me roll my eyes more and more.

And this, well this is the first time in a long time that I've become sick to my stomach over a news article.

Wow George, just wow. I can't believe I trusted you at one point.
 
2006-02-05 08:25:00 PM  
Taxcheat said:

No, actually you do use the PR department to shut him down. NASA's mission is to explore space, not babble on about "global warming" or publish in journals.


You are wrong. NASA's mission statement is published on their web page, and that mission clearly includes scientific research into climate.

As part of NASA's mission to conduct research, as scientists, they are EXPECTED and REQUIRED to publish their findings in scientific journals.

The PR department's job is to keep the agency on-message.

Again, you are wrong. Scientists do research, and the publish the results of that research. That is their job. If the PR department finds it difficult to accept the results of scientific research, it is not within the scope of a PR person's employment duties to censor scientific research that they disagree with.

If the PR person wants to do his own research, then he should go get a science degree and have at it. Until then, the PR person's oppinions on the results of research mean nothing.

The only person who sets NASA's mission is the Administrator.

Ahain, you are wrong. NASA is funded by Congress, with the taxpayer's money. The overall mission of NASA is determined by congress, and the Administrator is simply there to administer the details of completing the already-stated mission.

If the appointed personnel in the PR department is acting out of line, they'll be fired.

Again, you are wrong. If the PR person is acting out of line, but was appointed by a corrupt and crony-filled administration, then they'd have to phenominally fark things up like "brownie" to even get a reprimand.... and, like "Brownie", probably would still keep their jobs.

Only the career types have the freedom to do whatever they want without fear of ever being fired.

Again... you are wrong. There are procedures and rules for terminating the employment of carreer civil service employees who aren't doing their jobs.

None of those, however, apply to someone who *IS* doing his job, like Hansen. He's a scientist whose job is to conduct research on climate, and who is required to publish the results of his research.... the fact that this may anger fundies has no bearing on the fact that it is his job.

I'm assuming Hansen is SES, which means he's pulling down $140,000-150,000 to go off on his own personal crusade-- at taxpayer expense.

Again, you are wrong. Hansen is paid to do his job. His job is to research climate and to report the results of his research. That is what he is doing.

In fact, he's gone above and beyond the call of duty, by working to get the research results publicized *despite* a gang of fundies trying to sieze the helm.

Don't exhale, you're creating greenhouse gases.

Cute. The ignorant, fundie, psuedo-fascist made a funny. I'm sure that'll get a few laughs from your fellow staffers at the "catapult the bullshiat" strategic emergency message board response Bush defense center.
 
2006-02-05 08:25:27 PM  
Taxcheat

At least you have a sense of humor about all of this, and a thick skin.


OK everybody, nothing more to see here, go about your business. The horse is still dead, and has been for a few hours.
 
2006-02-05 08:35:18 PM  
matrix29 said:

There is this little thing that has plagued humanity the entire time of existence, it is called "The Human Condition".

The Human Condition is one of paranoia. Usually it requires humans to destroy all potential predators that are near (basic survival instinct), although it can manifest itself in useless time-wasting energy-wasting anti-mutation-hunting (racism). Education in tolerance can eliminate the problems of racism and the energy-wasting insanity that is a part of it.

The Human Condition is usually one of starving & poverty. Insecurities of humans usually prevent efficent resource sharing for the most efficent growth of the population. If the humans do indeed perfect methods of efficent resource control then overpopulation is another problem of concern. Once overpopulation begins (from lack or refusal of self-control over the sexual reproductive instinct) resource management techniques usually fail for lack of self control in the sexual urge issues. Self-restraint and non-reproductive diversionary methods (porn or homosexuality or masturbation) can minimize and control the problem of the Sexual Instinct.

The Human Condition is one of perpetual terror. Religion can distract or deny the terror that humans feel constantly, but often fails in the fact of cold hard facts. The cold truth of an uncaring universe that gives not an iota of mercy or compassion to any living thing's existence remains a curse solely for those that refuse to accept it. Religion is a useful crutch for remaining sane in an uncompassionate universe. Religion can, however, become an anchor that drags humanity downward back into misery if it denies the progress of science and the benefits that it brings.

The Human Condition is one of failure. Failure is useful for discovering mistakes which can indeed lead to progress. Denial of mistakes and refusal to learn from mistakes is a failure which denies human progress. Through documenting these mistakes and understanding & analyzing how those mistakes happened can humanity progress beyond THE HUMAN CONDITION.

Technology can not remove humans from the curse of The Human Condition, but it will allow better devices to control resource management as well as technology for exploiting energy transistion resources for better population growth & maintainance, more efficent methods of controlling sexual urges, and the refined materials for education in not reproducing past mistakes.

In all of this understanding, ignorance is the least functional and least worthy aspect of The Human Condition. Humans can only be worthwhile as SLAVES if they remain more ignorant than other educated humans. SLAVES are functional in value only slightly above the most intelligent work-animal or cart-pulling oxen for their ability to follow spoken commands. Ignorant humans are a burden upon every educated human around them. Ignorant humans that remain so into adulthood by deliberate reasons or for personal failures in motivation are quite less useful than the most functional work beast. The ignorance of children should be forgiven so long as the children are learning in a manner which is provable by testing. Humans that desire to be mostly useless SLAVES should be exploited until they gasp their last breath unless they have the desire to educate themselves out of self-imposed slavery.

The Human Condition can only be elevated from by education with using that education to correct the world so that human needs are met with logic and reason. Myths, fantasy, lies, illusion, and denial will change nothing of The Human Condition. Science and popular free education can raise humanity from The Human Condition. Religion is useful for philosophical matters, but utterly useless to deal with the physical cold hard truths of human survival. In fact, religion can often contribute to the worst aspects of The Human Condition in that it magnifies ignorance as a virtue and greed as a blessing.

God may or may not exist. Science may or may not prove God's existence. The result is that God will continue to exist if science disproves God, or God will not have ever existed if science disproves God. Human theories have no bearing on God, human facts will not bend God to human's will. The basic truths of the necessity of self-control, proper resource management, and education of the public to avoid past mistakes have no requirement for the existence of religion. We humans should remember this. We need to focus on the truths of human physical needs and controlling the unnecessary wants before turning our minds to the concerns of religious philosophy.


Interesting. Where is that from?

I'm assuming that's qouted from a book. I'd be curious enough to take a look at it. What book is it from?
 
2006-02-05 08:41:53 PM  
Taxcheat

You know, one thing just occurred to me. Dr Hansen and his minions in the NASA lab -- after spending all our taxpayer dollars to make the "moon landing" -- had all that equipment left over and decided to use it to make Brokeback Mountain.

I haven't read this entire thread, but it just occurred to me that some people speak (or post) before actually thinking. Do you even jokingly intend to infer that NASA (the National Aeronautics and Space Administration) has some kind of hidden gay agenda? Not that there is anything wrong with that.

/NASA has, at times, been a bit "cowboy," but I cannot find any hint that they have been gay.
 
2006-02-05 08:58:10 PM  
Poeple who want to live under the "terrible lie" should do so if that's what they want. But they should stay on their side of the line. The world's most intelligent are on the other side and one scientist is enough to combat the fakeness of 1000 cultists/liars. Vaccines, spacecraft, and climate models aren't made in cult dens or smoke filled rooms.
 
2006-02-05 09:03:02 PM  
Taxcheat said:

You know, one thing just occurred to me. Dr Hansen and his minions in the NASA lab -- after spending all our taxpayer dollars to make the "moon landing" -- had all that equipment left over and decided to use it to make Brokeback Mountain.

oldebayer: responded:
I haven't read this entire thread, but it just occurred to me that some people speak (or post) before actually thinking. Do you even jokingly intend to infer that NASA (the National Aeronautics and Space Administration) has some kind of hidden gay agenda?

No, actually he's trying to imply that the moon landings were faked. I would like to think this is a joke, but given the absolutely astounding level of sheer fundie ignornace and naked stupidity he has shown so far, I think he really means it.
 
2006-02-05 09:12:45 PM  
oldebayer

Here's a clue: "that was for blackmenace." The find feature of your browser can direct you to the explanation.

Ah, but why bother. It's more fun to post without reading.
 
2006-02-05 09:25:09 PM  
Submit to the will of my Invisible Friend, or I'm supposed to kill you.
 
2006-02-05 09:32:59 PM  
The world's most intelligent are on the other side and one scientist is enough to combat the fakeness of 1000 cultists/liars.

Ironpoint

Agreed. The religious right of the United States will be beaten to an intellectual pulp, just as the Catholic Church once was.

The problem the RR has is that they are going up against people that can counter-BS far more effectively:

"The path of the logical man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the self-righteous and the tyranny of evil men.

Blessed is he who, in the name of the betterment and good will to all man, shepherds the weak of mind through the valley of ignorance, for he is truly his brothers keeper and the finder of lost children

I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those that would attempt to poison a childs mind with pseudoscience and destroy the logical freedom of my brothers. And you will know my name is the Flying Spaghetti Monster, when I lay my noodley appendage upon you!"

"We provide you electricity. We test the food you eat. We make the guns that are used to guard you while you sleep.

DON'T FARK WITH US."

In the end, we will win. Not because we are right, but because they are so unbelievably incorrect it would be laughable if so many retards didn't take the matter seriously.
 
2006-02-05 09:33:40 PM  
In other news, NASA's PR dept is doing a heckuva job.
 
2006-02-05 09:36:52 PM  
serutan

Submit to the will of my Invisible Friend, or I'm supposed to kill you.

Only if I can dress like a pirate.
 
2006-02-05 10:06:37 PM  

Bears repeating.

*golf clap*

If you weren't a Tfer I'd sponsor you.


This is what gets me, yes its a theory, yes it means something different in the scientific community. What none of you wanna recognize is that even in their community there are different levels of a theory. Theory of gravity is almost an absolute, yes there are variables, but 99% of it holds up. As of yet there is nothing to even put ID or evolution in that category of 99%, evolution has more facts supporting it and it doesnt look like you will ever find any facts supporting ID. Except of course the bible, and do you really believe that is a historic document? God, I hope they dont.

/consider myself christian
//southern baptist even
///no we dont handle snakes
 
2006-02-05 10:14:22 PM  
This is what gets me, yes its a theory, yes it means something different in the scientific community. What none of you wanna recognize is that even in their community there are different levels of a theory.
Everyone recognises this! That is what everyone has been saying the whole time.

The difference between scientific method theories and the ID "theory", is that a scientific method theory must provide falsifiabilty (as well as evidence that supports the theory). If a "theory" doesn't have this, then it can't be compared to a scientific method theory. That's it. To do so is apples and oranges and completely intellectually dishonest.

There is npthing wrong with believing in ID, but you can't pretend that it is science.
 
2006-02-05 10:17:09 PM  
I really have had it with the anti-science, neo-con, radical right.

The pendulum is gonna start swinging back the other way soon.


And I hope you take it up the arse when it does.
 
2006-02-05 10:18:07 PM  
My head asplode. As a high school science teacher, I have to wonder what people are taught. A theory is an explanation for a broad range of observations and experimental results. My ninth graders know this, and some of them are essentially retarded. Now if it was called the Big Bang HYPOTHESIS, some debate might be in order. The beauty of science used to be that it was altruistic, in a sense. There was no belief, just fact. I hate people who confuse faith with science and feel they must rectify blind belief in an unseen deity with the knowledge that the universe might be complex in ways that their 6,000-2,000 year old text cannot explain. Perhaps it's time for a new edition to come out. Faith used to be able to coexist with knowledge. Not four hundred years ago, but since then and for a while. Thunder isn't God bowling. Deal with it.
 
2006-02-05 10:18:23 PM  
steamingpile: Theory of gravity is almost an absolute, yes there are variables, but 99% of it holds up. As of yet there is nothing to even put ID or evolution in that category of 99%

Evolution is a fact. It happened. There is no part of it which 'does not hold up'.

The theory of evolution i.e. how it happened, is one of the most well-established theories in all of science.
 
2006-02-05 10:19:31 PM  
ID or evolution
This is simply not true. There is a wealth of evidence supporting evolution, and nothing which proves it wrong. There are gaps in the theory, where there is no explanation, but nothing which proves that evolution is wrong.

As my post above stated. You can't compare the ID theory and the evoultion theory. It is impossible to compare them, because evolution is based on the scientific method, and ID is not.
 
2006-02-05 10:23:19 PM  
The Devil put fossils and dinosaurs in the Earth to test our faith. I know this because that is the most sensible, least-complex conclusion.
 
2006-02-05 10:23:21 PM  
2006-02-05 09:12:45 PM Taxcheat

Thanks for the heads-up on how to use my browser. I had, however, read enough of the thread, including a dozen or so posts by some tax cheater complaining about how his/her/its tax dollars were being spent, to know what's going on. :~)

Don't let me interrupt your troll.
 
2006-02-05 10:29:30 PM  
Yes, Evolution is a Theory and yes, the Big Bang is also a Theory

however Intelligent Design is a crock of shiat
 
2006-02-05 10:30:39 PM  
machoprogrammer
The Big Bang is just a theory, is it not?

In the scientific sense of the word, yes.

NOTE: I am not saying Big Bang isn't correct, but bashing the guy because he says its just a theory is stupid too.

Nobody is bashing him for saying it's just a theory. We're bashing him for the rather obvious alterior motive he has for ordering, in his official capacity, that every single instance of the phrase used be appended with "theory". Very different things, those two. The latter is, arguably, intended to confuse the public rather than to inform. And his defense of his thinking only revealed the depth of his desire to pervert science.
 
2006-02-05 10:31:10 PM  
The Devil put fossils and dinosaurs in the Earth to test our faith. I know this because that is the most sensible, least-complex conclusion.
He also gave us Occams razor to really fark with our heads
 
2006-02-05 10:31:18 PM  
Taxcheat:

You were more entertaining two or three usernames ago, but it's time to man up and admit you're eating the soggy biscuit in this thread.
 
2006-02-05 10:32:27 PM  
Drone1047
The pendulum is gonna start swinging back the other way soon.

No personal offense, but I get so farking tired of hearing this. When the "pendulum swung" the last time, you know what it took to get it back? The farking 60s. Vietnam. Nixon. All that shiat.

Quit acting like getting power back from these assclowns is just a matter of sitting on your hands and waiting. It isn't, that'll just get us all more of the same.
 
2006-02-05 10:34:36 PM  
img442.imageshack.us

Faith-freindly science, courtesy of the Bush Maladministration.

You never have to feel uncomfortable again!
 
2006-02-05 10:38:51 PM  
Taxcheat: Why bother responding time and time again, if you're going to keep getting absolutely owned, only to ignore the points made against you in favor of going on to spout the same old incorrect bullshiat over and over again?

Oh, right. Gotta catapult that propaganda, eh?
 
2006-02-05 10:46:52 PM  
Gotta catapult that propaganda, eh?
Riflemen are better for defense. Catapults are really vulnerable in the open.

source

Go Taxcheat! You go girl!
 
2006-02-05 11:09:18 PM  
Government:
www.amaze.it

No Government:
www.m6.is

Any questions?
 
2006-02-05 11:19:37 PM  
One point I would like to make:

Why the hell is 24 YEAR OLD given oversight to ANYTHING! He's making decisions in NASA, one of the last bastions of American intelligence and science? And his degree is in journalism? So much of this is farked. I'm not even talking about ID vs. evolution. Are there so few qualified people in the world that Bush is taking people straight out of college into positions of great influence? Or is it that so few qualified people will take take appointments from our illustrious president?

This country is farked, I'm just glad to be here at the end of all things.
 
2006-02-05 11:21:11 PM  
Any questions?
Did you join the KKK by corresponence or did you have to go to a ceremony somewhere?
 
2006-02-05 11:36:27 PM  
Older, more experienced people do not fit well into authoritarian heirarchies.

A 24 year old can be NASA decision maker under the Bush government because subservience is valued above all including experience, wisdom, and intellect.

Adolescents don't have much to bargain with in life and are more easily manipulated. There's probably relatively few experienced scientist or science related people who would toe the line for this position.

I could make a Hitler youth reference here, but I think MR_DING has already taken us there.
 
2006-02-06 12:01:56 AM  
Oh, God. How embarassing.

Naturally, the 24-year-old had no scientific background. Most scientists are smart, and smart people don't believe in creationism.
 
2006-02-06 12:08:46 AM  
So just add the word to intelligent design.

Intelligent design THEORY.


Even though it should be intelligence design myth!


ps If you belive in GOD your stupid
 
2006-02-06 12:16:51 AM  
ps If you belive in GOD your stupid
If you believe in education, "your" should be "you're", stupid

/first grammar nazi post. YAY
 
2006-02-06 01:08:50 AM  
propaganda officers

"Scientist who routinely took calls from reporters five years ago can now do so only if the interview is approved by administration officials in Washington, and then only if a public affairs officer is present or on the phone."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/science/earth/29climate.html?ex=1139​288400&e n=506ddeaeebcd71c5&ei=5070
 
2006-02-06 01:10:06 AM  
eraser8: You guys should check out an article from today's Washington Post: Eden and Evolution.


Not a bad article. Goes a little deeper than the typical article. The non-tenured professor with the anti-evolution article should not be hired due to incompetence, not the fact that she's exploring her intellectual freedom. I mean, imagine a EE prof coming in to lecture against Maxwell's laws because she believes in an aether. Usually anything you teach short of senior-level/graduate classes really ought to well accepted stuff, and research journals are the place to investigate contrary, new ideas.
 
2006-02-06 01:30:22 AM  
Taxcheat doesn't seem to understand the job of the Office of Public Affairs at NASA. According to the NASA Administrator, "the job of the Office of Public Affairs, at every level in NASA, is to convey the work done at NASA to our stakeholders in an intelligible way. It is not the job of public affairs officers to alter, filter or adjust engineering or scientific material produced by NASA's technical staff. To ensure timely release of information, there must be cooperation and coordination between our scientific and engineering community and our public affairs officers."

source:
http://www.nasa.gov/about/highlights/griffin_science.html
 
2006-02-06 01:41:00 AM  
You're not stupid to believe in a "god", just naive and credulous.
 
2006-02-06 01:46:31 AM  
"Scientist who routinely took calls from reporters five years ago can now do so only if the interview is approved by administration officials in Washington, and then only if a public affairs officer is present or on the phone."

Scientists from the USSR had minders as well to make sure they didn't say anything politically unsound.
 
2006-02-06 02:49:04 AM  
leathermidget: You're not stupid to believe in a "god", just naive and credulous.

do you know how many of the smarest minds to have ever lived on this silly planet you are calling naive and credulous?
 
Displayed 50 of 531 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report