4 years of high school? Give at least one semester to "conservative science".

Exposing global warming as a hoax was pretty important.

Scientific achievement isn't conservative or liberal. It is achievement. Liberals would like to direct scientific achievement to liberal goals rather than scientific goals. An example would be stem cell research. The most successful research has been with adult stem cells. the most progress in medical advancement has been with adult stem cells. The liberal goal is embryonic stem cell research because of its close ties to and support of abortion and removing all personhood from embryos. Because of the liberal goals, enbryonic stem cell research gets far more funding than the more successful adult stem cell research. It gets worse, even though the most success and development has been with adult stem cells, liberals continually point out that pursuing this successful avenue is anti science and imposing theocracy on the scientific community.

Libs cannot be taken seriously and should not. Liberals will stymie every advance that does not concommitantly advance liberal goals.
 
Science is actually conservative, not liberal.

Except in America, where conservatives believe that science is some manufactured liberal crisis.

When we think of prudence, carefulness, exactitude, and tradition, that's what conservatism is and that's what science is and how it works.

Liberalism on science would be "Creationism", which does not hold true to any tradition and is a total invention where we're supposed to just take it on faith that some force greater than ourselves must have created the planet, and so case closed, there must be a God. That's liberal thinking at its worst, while true science is firmly planted in conservative values.

What's liberal and what's conservative in America these days is totally backwards, but you can't really say so to the hardcore believers on both sides or they get really upset.

Like, you can't tell a conservative that drilling further and further offshore is not a conservative value. Or that plundering the earth is not a conservative, but a liberal value.
 
Accepting creationism as an absolute fact is as wrong as accepting evolution as an absolute fact. Both must be questioned. Allowing schools to encourage questioning both theories should be encouraged.
 

Are these 'scientists' also going to sue all the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities that have stated that AGW is real and a clear and present danger?

And is this list of 'scientists' the fake list of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine?
That outfit composed of a few people holed up in the woods somewhere close to the metropolis of Cave Junction, Oregon.

IPCC Researchers Admit Global Warming Fraud

Global warming alarmists are scrambling to save face after hackers stole hundreds of incriminating e-mails from a British university and published them on the Internet.

The messages were pirated from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia (UEA) and reveal correspondence between British and American researchers engaged in fraudulent reporting of data to favor their own climate change agenda. UEA officials confirmed one of their servers was hacked, and several of the scientists involved admitted the authenticity of the messages, according to the New York Times. The article opined, "The evidence pointing to a growing human contribution to global warming is so widely accepted that the hacked material is unlikely to erode the overall argument."

Climatologist Patrick J. Michaels challenged that position. "This is not a smoking gun, this is a mushroom cloud." The e-mails implicate scores of researchers, most of whom are associated with the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an organization many skeptics believe was created exclusively to provide evidence of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).


IPCC Researchers Admit Global Warming Fraud
 
Accepting creationism as an absolute fact is as wrong as accepting evolution as an absolute fact. Both must be questioned. Allowing schools to encourage questioning both theories should be encouraged.

Evolution is accepted as a "fact" because of the incredible amount of evidence that supports it. It's not called an "absolute" because new data is always turning up a better understanding, but the premise is the same.

Those that believe in the occult view magical creation as an "absolute" fact because in their lives of the supernatural, mysticism and the occult, there exists spirit beings that are understood to be "absolute".

The two are totally not connected. One deals with the real, substantive world and the other deals with the "unseen" and "unknowable".
 
Accepting creationism as an absolute fact is as wrong as accepting evolution as an absolute fact. Both must be questioned. Allowing schools to encourage questioning both theories should be encouraged.

Evolution is accepted as a "fact" because of the incredible amount of evidence that supports it. It's not called an "absolute" because new data is always turning up a better understanding, but the premise is the same.

Those that believe in the occult view magical creation as an "absolute" fact because in their lives of the supernatural, mysticism and the occult, there exists spirit beings that are understood to be "absolute".

The two are totally not connected. One deals with the real, substantive world and the other deals with the "unseen" and "unknowable".

Evolution is theory not fact...Get it straight
 
Accepting creationism as an absolute fact is as wrong as accepting evolution as an absolute fact. Both must be questioned. Allowing schools to encourage questioning both theories should be encouraged.

Evolution is accepted as a "fact" because of the incredible amount of evidence that supports it. It's not called an "absolute" because new data is always turning up a better understanding, but the premise is the same.

Those that believe in the occult view magical creation as an "absolute" fact because in their lives of the supernatural, mysticism and the occult, there exists spirit beings that are understood to be "absolute".

The two are totally not connected. One deals with the real, substantive world and the other deals with the "unseen" and "unknowable".

so lets see you prove that "magical creation" is absolute bullshit....just thought i would ask you again,because you seem so sure that it is indeed bullshit......
 
Accepting creationism as an absolute fact is as wrong as accepting evolution as an absolute fact. Both must be questioned. Allowing schools to encourage questioning both theories should be encouraged.

Evolution is accepted as a "fact" because of the incredible amount of evidence that supports it. It's not called an "absolute" because new data is always turning up a better understanding, but the premise is the same.

Those that believe in the occult view magical creation as an "absolute" fact because in their lives of the supernatural, mysticism and the occult, there exists spirit beings that are understood to be "absolute".

The two are totally not connected. One deals with the real, substantive world and the other deals with the "unseen" and "unknowable".

Finally some decent shit from your shit-for-brains.

You seem to be describing two extremes and yet in your interminable style you give credence- albeit qualified- to evolution while encumbering the concept of creation with notions of the supernatural, occult, magic, and mysticism. Typical of you to ascribe selective qualifiers.

You state that creation deals with the unseen and unknowable. If there's anything you see or know about creation then please share it with us. Otherwise- leave it as it is.

That being said- do you think you can accept the idea of the creation of the basic physical elements of the universe as a singular event that took place 12 billion years ago (according to scientific estimates)? And would you subsequently agree that the creation of those elements evolved over the succeding 12 billion years into what we are today?
 
Our educational system is fucked up ever thought it might be because it always starts with liberal something? such as liberal arts liberal science?
 
How about we teach our kids that science is not infallible, teach them to think independently - and critically.... and leave the politics out of the classroom? Because your way... dragging politics into our education system... it's not fucking working.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top