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.

(Huffington Post)   House Republicans declare war on science   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 53
    More: Dumbass, House Republicans, humans, Dana Rohrabacher, group object, Mount St. Helens, Jim Sensenbrenner, Competitive Enterprise Institute, climate policy  
•       •       •

10003 clicks; posted to Politics » on 13 Sep 2013 at 5:05 PM (43 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-09-13 06:18:59 PM
7 votes:
Seriously? An unpaid honorary position that should promote science gets shot down because the person being appointed might happen to agree with the prevailing theories on climate change?

What a loathsome pack of slack jawed morons the Republican Party has become.
2013-09-13 08:00:46 PM
5 votes:

AntiNerd: Higher education leads to liberalism so I don't think you could expect anything different from them.


Not necessarily to "liberalism" in the economic sense, but it definitely makes someone far more likely to question traditional dogmatic belief systems, like Bible literalism, traditional gender roles, the established societal pecking order, etc.  It also tends to make people more tolerant and less fearful/hateful of the "other" (other ethnic or religious groups, gays, etc.)

The problem is that the modern conservative movement is fundamentally based on the type of traditional dogmatic thinking that can't stand up to facts, scrutiny, and critical thinking.  Since higher education promotes critical thinking skills, people tend to be less conservative/traditional in their beliefs when they graduate.

Conservatives see this intellectual transformation as "ivory tower leftist indoctrination", when in reality what is happening is that when people are given the tools to think for themselves, they are able to see the flaws in traditional dogmatic beliefs.
2013-09-13 05:14:00 PM
5 votes:

jigger: Just wait until the next Republican president selects the science laureate to spread their message across the land. Then you'll know this was a good idea.


Somehow I doubt the National Academy of Sciences would ever submit a creationist, flat-earther, climate change denier to any president for selection.
2013-09-13 05:33:12 PM
4 votes:
... I think it's about time for Science to declare war on Republicans.
2013-09-13 04:58:22 PM
4 votes:
So up until now it was an undeclared war then?

/dnctfl
2013-09-13 06:17:59 PM
3 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: It's not a 'War on Science'.  I agree with not creating yet another bs public figure (with accompanying staff & payroll) on borrowed money to help promote the democrat party.


==

The bipartisan Senators who proposed this are truly 'history's greatest monsters.'

"Like the Poet Laureate, the Science Laureate would be an unpaid, honorary post," according to the statement. The laureate would serve a 1- or 2-year term, and "would also be encouraged to continue their important scientific work." Nominees would be vetted by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.  "The U.S. Science Laureate will be a national role model who can encourage students to learn more about the sciences," Hirono said in the statement. "By elevating great American scientific communicators, we can empower students - especially girls and minorities - to get excited about science."

And I'm sure as Ron and Rand Paul will both tell you, there is no U.S. National Academy of Sciences in the Constitution. Thanks goodness the 101st Fighting Keyboardists like yourself are there to save us from the terrors of encouraging school children and the public from getting more interested in science.
2013-09-13 05:07:07 PM
3 votes:
FTA:  House leadership pulled the bill from the schedule. It's now expected to go back to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology for a debate.

Oh right. You mean that committee with the chairman who's a climate change denier? This should be productive.
2013-09-14 02:06:42 AM
2 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: Zeppelininthesky:  There is literally no debate among scientists that global warming not only exists, that it is changing the Earth and that humans are a direct contributor.


That's bullsh*t.


No, it is not.

http://epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence

The only folks that doubt global warming are anti-science folks who regularly ignore evidence that contradicts their claim. They are also funded by the oil and gas companies.
2013-09-14 01:44:17 AM
2 votes:

Mentat: Neighborhood Watch: /also, it wasn't Republicans who killed NASA

Gee, I wonder what could have happened in 2010 that made it difficult to fund NASA projects?


*raises hand*

Ohh ohh ohhh pick me I know!

The Republicans made a total mess of the economy and cut spending despite the fact that short term spending in a depressed economy is the proven method to turn things around.
2013-09-14 12:31:42 AM
2 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: PsiChick: It helps to troll if you RTFA, specifically the part where they mention that it's a non-paid position. As in, no staff or money.


I don't know what the 'troll' comment refers to, but I don't see why Republicans should vote to create an official government voice for Global WarmingTM taxes, outside of the democrat party.  If the 'job' is non-paid, then why can't these scientists do all of this for free now?  Is something stopping them?  Why do they need Republicans to vote for it?


They are doing it for free, and they're getting harassed to hell and back by the Know Nothings.
2013-09-13 08:50:31 PM
2 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: First things first.Government schools aren't teaching kids to read & write yet.


Not that you'd ever have or propose or be able to discuss a metric by which any results would be measured. As usual your sociopolitical opinion is unsubstantiated, anecdotal and worthless. Certainly not worth influencing public policy in any way.
2013-09-13 07:46:31 PM
2 votes:

jjorsett: Sounds more like a war on making yet another government-paid unnecessary job, and that's a good thing.


You read neither the article nor the thread. You fail. I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.
2013-09-13 07:17:48 PM
2 votes:
Perhaps they should read some books rather than burning them.
2013-09-13 07:15:47 PM
2 votes:
ecx.images-amazon.com
It's a very depressing read...
2013-09-13 06:54:14 PM
2 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: Government schools aren't teaching kids to read & write yet.


Oh they read.
i43.tinypic.com
2013-09-13 06:46:41 PM
2 votes:

highendmighty: And sort of along those lines, why do we need a cheerleader for science to go, what, school to school? to tell people how great being a scientist is? I don't think that is really necessary - a waste of money when you have Bill Nye, Beakman, et al. reaching more kids anyway.


I got into science because Carl Sagan was a cheerleader who told me how great being a scientist was.
2013-09-13 06:04:02 PM
2 votes:

highendmighty: And sort of along those lines, why do we need a cheerleader for science to go, what, school to school? to tell people how great being a scientist is? I don't think that is really necessary - a waste of money when you have Bill Nye, Beakman, et al. reaching more kids anyway.


Yea, unpaid positions are a waste of money!
2013-09-13 05:52:42 PM
2 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: All2morrowsparTs: Are you a caricature?


I'm just me, baby.  I'm just me.

/I also happen to be right


Sad, you would be better as satire.
2013-09-13 05:16:36 PM
2 votes:
Declare war????

This is just another skirmish in their fight to make America take first place in a world wide race to the bottom.
2013-09-13 05:10:27 PM
2 votes:
So the previous 100 years has just been what, a skirmish?
2013-09-13 05:07:26 PM
2 votes:
Higher education leads to liberalism so I don't think you could expect anything different from them.
2013-09-13 04:54:25 PM
2 votes:
Did the Sad tag beat the Obvious tag to death?
2013-09-14 07:15:06 AM
1 votes:

robohobo: Neil Degrasse Tyson smirks at partisan hacks.


February 2009.  The Republicans have taken a sharp turn for the worse since then.
2013-09-14 06:13:47 AM
1 votes:
2013-09-14 02:38:04 AM
1 votes:

log_jammin: mgshamster: What about half the people on the Congressional Science Committee? Like Todd "Legitamite Rape" Akin.

wait what? akin claims to be a scientist?

mgshamster: Or anyone at the National Center for Complimentary and Alternative Medicine?

I....had no idea that existed. wtf???


I'm not sure if he ever claimed to be an actual scientist, but he did (does?) serve on a science committee at the national level. There are also several creationists on the committee.

As for the NCCAM, yeah. Disappointing, ain't it? The con-artists are doing the same thing in my own state, with a government or for naturopaths who are dedicated on getting state approval to be primary and family practitioners, "because we don't have enough physicians."
2013-09-14 02:18:25 AM
1 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: Zeppelininthesky: The only folks that doubt global warming are anti-science folks who regularly ignore evidence that contradicts their claim. They are also funded by the oil and gas companies.


You're just wrong.

I'm not calling you stupid (or any of the names here that everyone is calling me), I'm just saying that you're being close-minded IMO.  I mean, you've literally shut your mind off from the possibility of being wrong.

That's not very 'scientific'.  In fact, it's the opposite.


Hmmmmm

I link actual data linked to literally thousands of studies that conclude that climate change is happening, and you link one article with no evidence.

Sounds legit.
2013-09-14 01:57:47 AM
1 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: It's my belief that Global WarmingTM is a hoax, but that doesn't mean I'm anti-science.


Actually, that's exactly what it means.
2013-09-14 01:57:18 AM
1 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: In the above examples, it is Republicans/conservatives who embrace the science... and not the other way around.


How you get any bites at all is a mystery to me.
2013-09-14 01:55:31 AM
1 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: cloning humans for organ harvesting.


You really have absolutely no grasp of what is actually going on.
2013-09-14 01:41:15 AM
1 votes:

tbeatty: Explain to me why we need a political appointee for science?  Is science dependent on ideology?  How about we leave political advocacy to politicians and not appoint political people posing as scientists to government jobs.


So oil companies get to engage in political advocacy but not scientists?  Sorry, no dice.  My livelihood is intimately tied to what happens in Washington, and I deserve to have someone there lobbying for me just like everyone else does.
2013-09-14 01:35:07 AM
1 votes:
Neighborhood Watch:

*SIGH*

Hello,  Rush Limbaugh Sent Me. How long 'til you're plonked this time, y'think?
2013-09-14 01:19:52 AM
1 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: In fact, I can't think of one scientific thing that a conservative/Republican would be 'at war' with.  And before you say 'evolution' or 'stem cell research' (there isn't a war on either one)


LOL
2013-09-14 12:38:30 AM
1 votes:

Neighborhood Watch: PsiChick: It helps to troll if you RTFA, specifically the part where they mention that it's a non-paid position. As in, no staff or money.


I don't know what the 'troll' comment refers to, but I don't see why Republicans should vote to create an official government voice for Global WarmingTM taxes, outside of the democrat party.  If the 'job' is non-paid, then why can't these scientists do all of this for free now?  Is something stopping them?  Why do they need Republicans to vote for it?


The 'troll' comment refers to the fact that I have you farkied as 'cannot care about other people', so either you're a  stunningly unaware sociopath or a troll. Do you know what a poet laureate is? A science laureate would be the same thing. It has nothing whatsoever to do with taxes or global warming. It has to do with recognition of achievement within a field.
2013-09-13 08:30:39 PM
1 votes:

dookdookdook: "There's no way to make it work," Ebell said. "It would still give scientists an opportunity to pontificate, and we're opposed to it."

Serious question: Besides American conservatives, is there any other nationally-powerful organization in any other country as openly and proudly hostile to science in particular and objective reality in general this side of the Taliban?


News Corp.  And like the Taliban, they're not just powerful nationally, but internationally.
2013-09-13 08:09:06 PM
1 votes:

jigger: How about one that does nothing but go around the country dispelling myths about GMOs and fracking?


I oppose GMO foods but not because I think they're unsafe to eat, they're about as safe as anything else you can pull off a store shelf these days. What I oppose in GMO foods is Monsanto splicing in terminator genes into their seed stores. That's a farking agricultural holocaust just waiting to happen.
2013-09-13 08:07:30 PM
1 votes:

vygramul: HighZoolander: vygramul: HighZoolander: [ecx.images-amazon.com image 234x346]
It's a very depressing read...

It's also seriously flawed.

how so? (I'm not very far into it yet)

There is some minor exaggerations, but the most irritating thing was the double standard. Example: Republicans are unscientific for not wanting to first do the research before declaring something can't work, and then the Republicans were unscientific for wanting to do the research on SDI when it was obvious it wouldn't work.

There were good points to be made, but Mooney didn't write an objective book exploring the problem, he wrote a polemic.


I can see it being polemical, but I'm not sure I see how the example you give here is a double standard - scientists should do research to determine whether something can work. Once it is obvious (assuming that that is truly clear) that something can't work, I can see an argument that it's unscientific to continue to pursue it. It seems that continuing in the face of prior evidence that you will fail suggests that you are not motivated by those prior conclusions, but by politics or money or something else. And if you've never done the research to arrive at those prior conclusions, maybe there isn't a scientific basis for the continued work either.

Unless I missed the point of your example?
2013-09-13 07:00:58 PM
1 votes:
Not having a "Science Laureate" doesn't bother me that much. It would just be a lightning rod for the right-wing nutjobs. I've heard enough about all the "czars" that Obama has appointed. What does bother me though is the Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships and the recently created Office of Faith-Based Community Initiatives.
2013-09-13 06:47:09 PM
1 votes:

Serious Black: nmrsnr: Did the Sad tag beat the Obvious tag to death?

Sad, obvious, dumbass, asinine, fail...they all would have worked I think. I went with dumbass because that's what declaring a war on science will turn America into: a bunch of dumbasses.

/subby


If this keepa up soon we'll need a new tag: USA :(
2013-09-13 06:22:09 PM
1 votes:

highendmighty: jigger: Fart_Machine: jigger: How about one that does nothing but go around the country dispelling myths about GMOs and fracking?

So you're saying they're going to create a Lobbyist Laureate?

What the hell do you think the purpose of that post is?

And sort of along those lines, why do we need a cheerleader for science to go, what, school to school? to tell people how great being a scientist is?  I don't think that is really necessary - a waste of money when you have Bill Nye, Beakman, et al. reaching more kids anyway.


It's a waste of the $0 they were going to pay?  It's an honorary position.
2013-09-13 06:20:03 PM
1 votes:
Again?
2013-09-13 05:56:34 PM
1 votes:

dookdookdook: "There's no way to make it work," Ebell said. "It would still give scientists an opportunity to pontificate, and we're opposed to it."

Serious question: Besides American conservatives, is there any other nationally-powerful organization in any other country as openly and proudly hostile to science in particular and objective reality in general this side of the Taliban?


Yup. The Anti-Vax movement.
2013-09-13 05:52:50 PM
1 votes:

Evil High Priest: 2wolves: Yet all of them rely every day upon the results of science.

I propose we withhold all of these results until such a time as they stop being morons.


Trouble would be that they would pretend to stop being morans but their inner idiot would continue spring forth and they'd beg forgiveness.  Just like when they get busted trolling truckstops and men's rooms.
2013-09-13 05:49:59 PM
1 votes:
Good.  Progress is in direct opposition to scientific discovery.  Just try to name a single thing science has ever done for anyone.  And for the last time, refrigeration doesn't count.  That's just Jesus turning a cold shoulder to those filthy libs.
2013-09-13 05:34:13 PM
1 votes:
We are so f'ed as a country.
2013-09-13 05:34:07 PM
1 votes:

Marcus Aurelius: So up until now it was an undeclared war then?

/dnctfl


Before it was a Police Action.
2013-09-13 05:32:17 PM
1 votes:

jigger: How about one that does nothing but go around the country dispelling myths about GMOs and fracking?


So you're saying they're going to create a Lobbyist Laureate?
2013-09-13 05:20:12 PM
1 votes:
Yet all of them rely every day upon the results of science.
2013-09-13 05:12:39 PM
1 votes:
Just wait until the next Republican president selects the science laureate to spread their message across the land. Then you'll know this was a good idea.
2013-09-13 05:11:21 PM
1 votes:
"There's no way to make it work," Ebell said. "It would still give scientists an opportunity to pontificate, and we're opposed to it."

Serious question: Besides American conservatives, is there any other nationally-powerful organization in any other country as openly and proudly hostile to science in particular and objective reality in general this side of the Taliban?
2013-09-13 05:07:58 PM
1 votes:
Science laureate?  Is that like a poetry laureate?  Why not a scientist laureate?
2013-09-13 05:07:50 PM
1 votes:

nmrsnr: Did the Sad tag beat the Obvious tag to death?


Sad, obvious, dumbass, asinine, fail...they all would have worked I think. I went with dumbass because that's what declaring a war on science will turn America into: a bunch of dumbasses.

/subby
2013-09-13 05:02:38 PM
1 votes:
Again?
2013-09-13 04:52:02 PM
1 votes:
img.fark.net
 
Displayed 53 of 53 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report