CDZ Biology Deniers

[Chuz Life]

We already know climate change happens, regardless of Man's input.

We need to advance science and technology, until we can develop our own, Atlantis type, submersible cities.

Our "finals" is to be able to build a RingWorld by the time our sun goes supernova.

My question is this; "Of all the climate changes that we have experienced so far, how much of it can ONLY be attributed to the actions of mankind and can NOT be attributed to any form of natural causes?"

 

[danielpalos]

We already know climate change happens, regardless of Man's input.

We need to advance science and technology, until we can develop our own, Atlantis type, submersible cities.

Our "finals" is to be able to build a RingWorld by the time our sun goes supernova.

My question is this; "Of all the climate changes that we have experienced so far, how much of it can ONLY be attributed to the actions of mankind and can NOT be attributed to any form of natural causes?"

do we have to care? climate change happens, regardless.

 

[Chuz Life]

We already know climate change happens, regardless of Man's input.

We need to advance science and technology, until we can develop our own, Atlantis type, submersible cities.

Our "finals" is to be able to build a RingWorld by the time our sun goes supernova.

My question is this; "Of all the climate changes that we have experienced so far, how much of it can ONLY be attributed to the actions of mankind and can NOT be attributed to any form of natural causes?"

do we have to care? climate change happens, regardless.

Of course we don't have to care.

But that's not why I am asking the question.

I am simply interested in what percentage of climate change the "sky is falling" fear mongering members are willing to attribute to more natural causes.

 

[D Truth]

"Science" in the sense the OP implies is religion.
Anyone who doesn't believe in the established religion of the OP is heretic.

Is that what you are saying OP?

 

[Muhammed]

From an educational standpoint - what can be done to educate our youth and prevent them from going down this progressive path of denying science, denying climate data, denying biology, etc.

There is a large push recently to place ideology over reality. It's important to curb that and it can really only be done through education.

Matt Walsh: Let’s start calling them ‘biology deniers’

It seems to me that Walsh is a climategate denier.

The authors of the leaked emails do not even deny that they are authentic.

 

[Dragonlady]

Let's try to discuss the OP and not divert on other tangents.

The subject is about the left's denials and confusion about biology.
p

Ah so this is just another Right Wing propaganda thread.

Where has there been any propaganda on this? It's simple science and biology.

Propaganda is like when the left justifies their denial of scientific facts by saying things like "the RW only cares about them until they are born"

That is propaganda!

Sent from my SM-N920V using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

No that's a proven fact. No health care unless your parents can afford it (the Republicans voted to defund CHIP this week). No breakfast or lunch programs for poor kids. They've voted to defund these programs as well. Schools in poor areas get less funding than in wealthy areas. No maternity leave to give the infants a good start. No help with day care for the poor.

The list goes on and on.



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Chuz Life]

Let's try to discuss the OP and not divert on other tangents.

The subject is about the left's denials and confusion about biology.
p

Ah so this is just another Right Wing propaganda thread.

Where has there been any propaganda on this? It's simple science and biology.

Propaganda is like when the left justifies their denial of scientific facts by saying things like "the RW only cares about them until they are born"

That is propaganda!

Sent from my SM-N920V using USMessageBoard.com mobile app

No that's a proven fact. No health care unless your parents can afford it (the Republicans voted to defund CHIP this week). No breakfast or lunch programs for poor kids. They've voted to defund these programs as well. Schools in poor areas get less funding than in wealthy areas. No maternity leave to give the infants a good start. No help with day care for the poor.

The list goes on and on.

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

I see the disconnect now.

You see "caring" as though it is defined by how much FREE shit one can get or claim an entitlement to. We don't.

That doesn't mean that republicans do not support Charity efforts, they do so in very big ways through food pantries, donations etc. And I dare say they give (and care) through those charitable organizations as a greater percentage than the poor broke drug infested leftardz who are looking for a gubmint handout do.

 

[P@triot]

Regressives continue to attempt to take society back to the 1500's when technology didn't exist and everyone was ruled by a king...

Malkin: Ultrasound: The anti-science Left’s bugaboo

 

[flacaltenn]

From an educational standpoint - what can be done to educate our youth and prevent them from going down this progressive path of denying science, denying climate data, denying biology, etc.

There is a large push recently to place ideology over reality. It's important to curb that and it can really only be done through education.

Matt Walsh: Let’s start calling them ‘biology deniers’

Matt Walsh is one of favorite writers. And editor of my favorite politic/journal magazine Reason. But I really disagree on him on this piece. There ARE biological sexual ambiguities. Legitimately recognized by both the Med and Psych professions and the huff over all of this is determined by them and science, not how one "declares" themselves to be. These differences range from genital anomalies to hormonal issues. And at some point, with the consent and help of the professionals -- you HAVE to choose and act. Don't think that should be done or FORCED (or encouraged by overbearing parents) at such young ages tho..

OTH --- if you looking for "deniers" -- the left is FULL of them. I imagine most of the crystal worshipping/ "new age" shops are full on a "lefty" phenomenon. As is the belief in homeopathic remedies and other "anti-science" beliefs. And OF COURSE -- there's the opposition to genetic engineering, nanotechnology, food preservation by irradiation, and all things nuclear. Even tho Nuclear Medicine is a feature of every full service hospital and commercial nuclear has gone thru 3 generations of development since most of the worlds plants were built.

And of course Global Warming.. Which is a MUCH more complex issue than 97% of the country realizes. And the more EXTREME predictions are not "settled science" and cannot be polled by simple ass questions like "Is the planet warming?" or "Does man play some kind of role?".. There are at least 6 or 8 key GW questions to be answered to get a rational opinion. But the media and the public never GET that far and take the verdict pretty much "on faith"..

 

[flacaltenn]

Regressives continue to attempt to take society back to the 1500's when technology didn't exist and everyone was ruled by a king...

Malkin: Ultrasound: The anti-science Left’s bugaboo

EXACTLY ! Best quote from that article.

Next in the anti-science Atlantic's investigative series: How X-rays pushed the idea that humans have skeletons! How microscopes pushed the idea that microorganisms exist! How electroencephalograms pushed the idea that human brains send electrical impulses! - See more at: Malkin: Ultrasound: The anti-science Left’s bugaboo

 

[Boss]

In psychology it's called the Semmelweis reflex.

Named for Ignaz Semmelweis, a Hungarian physician who discovered in 1847, that physicians could dramatically reduce deaths to their patients by washing their hands. Back then, it was not uncommon for a doctor to dig around in a cadaver and then operate on a live patient without any washing of the hands.

When he first made his discovery, he tried to convince others and they resoundingly rejected his findings. In fact, they were quite insulted and offended that he would insinuate the hands of a gentlemen could transmit disease. He continued to write to medical societies and they continued to laugh and ridicule his silly notions. Years went by, he kept pushing the practice of hand washing in his clinics and saw remarkable success but no one would listen to him.

Some twenty years he tried to get someone to take him seriously. He became increasingly frustrated and angered that everyone, every single doctor he approached, rejected him on face value without even trying his method. He finally became so enraged in his writings that his family and contemporaries thought he was going crazy and had him institutionalized. A couple of weeks later, he died after being beaten severely by the guards.

It took another 15-20 years after his death before someone finally realized he was on to something. Can you imagine? You've made a discovery like this and people think you're crazy? For 20 years you try to get someone to listen and they lock you away as a madman. You die, never to realize what a tremendous contribution you made to medicine.

Science is not a matter of popular opinion. It doesn't matter if 97% of scientists agree or 99.999% agree. The nature of science itself is to question. Popular consensus was Ignaz Semmelweis was a goofball.

 

[P@triot]

The left continues to deny science...

Party Of Science: Democrat Brianna Wu Doesn't Know How Gravity Works

 

[bt404]

As far as I know, those who believe in magical resurrections, that the earth is 5000 years old, that Virgins can have babies, that snakes talk, and man once roamed with dinosaurs ALWAYS tend to come from the right. As are those who want to indoctrinate the young by advocating the dogma of creationism to be taught alongside an actual science like evolution as if the two were equals. The level of hypocrisy and ignorance here is stunningly comical.

 

[P@triot]

As far as I know, those who believe in magical resurrections, that the earth is 5000 years old, that Virgins can have babies, that snakes talk, and man once roamed with dinosaurs ALWAYS tend to come from the right. The level of hypocrisy and ignorance here is almost comical.

Until you can leverage science to unequivocally prove that Jesus did in fact not rise from the dead - there is absolutely zero hypocrisy here.

In fact, just making that statement only further supports the premise of this thread. You have come to a conclusion about something without a single shred of scientific evidence. What's more is that there has been a recent rash of incidents where people have "woken up" in funeral homes after being declared "dead" by a medical professional. If we can't even get something so basic right in today's era of highly sophisticated technology, any rational person would conclude that they most certainly didn't get it right during that era.

Man, Declared Dead, Wakes Up in Body Bag at Funeral Home

 

[bt404]

As far as I know, those who believe in magical resurrections, that the earth is 5000 years old, that Virgins can have babies, that snakes talk, and man once roamed with dinosaurs ALWAYS tend to come from the right. The level of hypocrisy and ignorance here is almost comical.

Until you can leverage science to unequivocally prove that Jesus did in fact not rise from the dead - there is absolutely zero hypocrisy here.

In fact, just making that statement only further supports the premise of this thread. You have come to a conclusion about something without a single shred of scientific evidence. What's more is that there has been a recent rash of incidents where people have "woken up" in funeral homes after being declared "dead" by a medical professional. If we can't even get something so basic right in today's era of highly sophisticated technology, any rational person would conclude that they most certainly didn't get it right during that era.

Man, Declared Dead, Wakes Up in Body Bag at Funeral Home

Until you can leverage science to unequivocally prove that Jesus did in fact not rise from the dead - there is absolutely zero hypocrisy here.

See Bertrand Russell's teapot analogy. If one were to claim, without offering proof, that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, one could not expect anyone to believe him solely because his assertion could not be proven wrong. In other words, if you're going to make a huge claim such as the notion that Jesus rose from the dead, the burden of proof is on YOU, not science. We do not need to prove that Jesus did not rise from the dead because we have no proof that he in fact did in the first place.

You have come to a conclusion about something without a single shred of scientific evidence. What's more is that there has been a recent rash of incidents where people have "woken up" in funeral homes after being declared "dead" by a medical professional. If we can't even get something so basic right in today's era of highly sophisticated technology, any rational person would conclude that they most certainly didn't get it right during that era.

So because there have been anomalies where people have woken up in funeral homes, that means that a book written thousands of years ago in the middle east by illiterate preachers is divine. You made a huge deductive leap there. Like I said, if you're going to make a huge assertion such as the notion that "god" had a son who was born of a virgin and who "died for our sin", the burden of proof is on you, not me.

 

[P@triot]

See Bertrand Russell's teapot analogy. If one were to claim, without offering proof, that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, one could not expect anyone to believe him solely because his assertion could not be proven wrong. In other words, if you're going to make a huge claim such as the notion that Jesus rose from the dead, the burden of proof is on YOU, not science. We do not need to prove that Jesus did not rise from the dead because we have no proof that he in fact did in the first place.

In other words - your stomach dropped when I made you realize that you're making outrageous claims without a shred of scientific evidence to back it up. The "burden of proof" on my end has been met - we have witnesses that testified as to the resurrection of Christ and documented it for all of humanity.

Your claim that it did not happen now places the burden of proof squarely on your shoulders. And so far, you've presented absolutely nothing. Not even a theory, much less scientific evidence. Game over.

 

[P@triot]

So because there have been anomalies...

Bingo! The are "anomalies". Such as the Virgin Mary. Such as the resurrection of Christ. You said it yourself - the are anomalies. Thank you.

 

[Boss]

As far as I know, those who believe in magical resurrections, that the earth is 5000 years old, that Virgins can have babies, that snakes talk, and man once roamed with dinosaurs ALWAYS tend to come from the right. As are those who want to indoctrinate the young by advocating the dogma of creationism to be taught alongside an actual science like evolution as if the two were equals. The level of hypocrisy and ignorance here is stunningly comical.

You're right, it's crazy to be teaching evolution alongside creationism. One is about how life grows and blossoms and the other is about how life originates. Creationism clearly needs to be taught alongside Abiogenesis. With regard to that, we can talk about the hundreds of theories or the hundreds of dogmas. A first fundamental of nature, life comes from life, has to be wrong for Abiogenesis to work. But that's the only other valid theory on origin of life. This is why a vast majority of civilization believes life comes from something beyond the physical. They may differ on what their ideas are with what that is, but they believe in something. Estimates are, only about 5% of the population is truly Nihilist.

Now you see, I just explained all that really needs to be explained in schools with just a paragraph and no need for any religious dogma. Just a redirect to the proper match-up. How life evolved after God created it, isn't really a concern with me, it sort of reinforces my awe in His ability.

 

[bt404]

See Bertrand Russell's teapot analogy. If one were to claim, without offering proof, that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, one could not expect anyone to believe him solely because his assertion could not be proven wrong. In other words, if you're going to make a huge claim such as the notion that Jesus rose from the dead, the burden of proof is on YOU, not science. We do not need to prove that Jesus did not rise from the dead because we have no proof that he in fact did in the first place.

In other words - your stomach dropped when I made you realize that you're making outrageous claims without a shred of scientific evidence to back it up. The "burden of proof" on my end has been met - we have witnesses that testified as to the resurrection of Christ and documented it for all of humanity.

Your claim that it did not happen now places the burden of proof squarely on your shoulders. And so far, you've presented absolutely nothing. Not even a theory, much less scientific evidence. Game over.

No the burden of proof is still on you, you see? You made the claim that a baby named Jesus was bornof Virgin. What's the proof of this? I'm waiting...You have absolutely nothing...

 

[there4eyeM]

That anomalies are conceivable does not prove a virgin conceived. A person's personal experience is the only basis for 'faith', and cannot be expected to be the basis for anyone else.