On Science, Human Nature, and the Nature of Science

[PoliticalChic]

This story was in the news this week:


1. "Mystery black rain hits Michigan town: Tar-like substance falls from the sky and leaves residents bewildered as it covers cars, porches and driveways.

A city in Michigan is perplexed after a a tar-like substance has rained down on their cars, porches and driveways this week.

The black, oily substance first appeared on at least six driveways in Harrison Township on Sunday, and days later, what the material is still remains a mystery.

Michigan Department of Environmental Quality officials collected samples...."
Mysterious tar-like oily substance covers driveways in Michigan


Now, we moderns would love to believe....perhaps, trained to believe, that science can do anything, knows everything...and can explain all.



2. Which brought back to me a recollection of Charles Fort.

"For over thirty years, Charles Fort sat in the libraries of New York City and London, assiduously reading scientific journals, newspapers, and magazines, collecting notes on phenomena that lay outside the accepted theories and beliefs of the time."
Charles Fort - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mr. Fort understood the how truly wide and deep science and scientists' limitations are.




3. Some time ago I happened to pick up a tome called "The Book of The Damned," by Charles Fort. Fort was a strange individual with an inordinate interest in the unexplained, the facts that science couldn't account for...facts he called 'the damned.'
These unexplained incidents and events were 'damned' by science...ignored because they dull the luster of some imagined all-powerful science.
Fort collected tons of newspaper articles, such as the one in item #1 above....


"The damned data Charles Fort gathered covered so many marvels, mysteries, and monsters--including unidentified aerial objects, frog falls, ship disappearances, red rains, earthquake lights, lake monsters, animal mutilations, psychic explosions, and much, much more. "I discovered the works of Charles Fort in 1959 and jumped into the pursuit of the unknown in the decades that followed. All the while, Fort's humor and skepticism have served me well. "Charles Fort, who died in 1932,..."
Amazon.com: The Book of the Damned (9781596050273): Charles Fort: Books



4. From reviews of Fort's books....

"...skepticism for the findings and conclusions of mainstream science, ...lethal sarcasm to debunk the dogmatic... to challenge the authority of establishment science.


He describes the book as an assemblage of data of external relations of this earth, "damned" by those who hold for our planet's isolation.

... 100s of examples of bizzare unexplained phenomena such as things falling from the sky (ranging from frogs or fish to metal objects) to spontaneous combustion, to unidentified flying objects, to time travel among others and actually exposes science's comical "answers" to these phenomena.


Frogs that have been rained by the sky or fish for that matter are not a phenomenon that has stopped. It still happens. The "official explanation" remains as hilarious as it was back in Fort's times, namely: a hurricane or a whirlwind picks them up and "rains" them somewhere else. However, why these winds are selective in what they pick up remains unanswered by science."


Stories like "Mystery black rain ....Tar-like substance falls from the sky" and hundreds more like them are cataloged in Charles Fort's books.
The books bear witness to....and remind us.....that it is folly to imagine scientists are wizards.


They are only men....much like the rest of us.
No more, no less.

 

[PoliticalChic]

5. A healthy skepticism as to what science can do...and what it actually is, would be a welcome characteristic in society today. Unfortunately, far too many see scientists as the little folks in Oz saw the wizard.


It wasn't an accident that the Frank Baum gave the wizard's full name as
Oscar Zoroaster Phadrig Isaac Norman Henkle Emmannuel Ambroise Diggs
(hint: what are his initials?)




Take a careful look at what Richard Lewontin, a leader in developing the mathematical basis of population genetics and evolutionary theory, admits about 'science:'


“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs,” the geneticist Richard Lewontin remarked equably in The New York Review of Books, “in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories.” We are to put up with science’s unsubstantiated just-so stories because, Lewontin explains, “we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door!”



"...failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, ... tolerance .... for unsubstantiated just-so stories.”

Get that???

Science???


What would Charles Fort have said about that?

 

[JoeB131]

Even Charles FOrt would say you are nuts...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Even Charles FOrt would say you are nuts...

Let's examine your basis for saying that.....
For those keeping records at home.....how many of Fort's tomes have you read?


Seems to be the same basis for most of your posts......rabies.

 

[PoliticalChic]

6 .There's a straight line from the idea that science and reason are golden, are the best way to lead mankind, to the French Revolution...and "also the beginnings of modern totalitarian government and large-scale executions of "enemies of the People" by impersonal government entities (Robespierre's "Committee of Public Safety"). This legacy would not reach its fullest bloom until the tragic arrival of the German Nazis and Soviet and Chinese communists of the 20th century." French Revolution - Robespierre, and the Legacy of the Reign of Terror


a. But, examples of morality intrinsic in nature are as rare as hens teeth. What is left? "God is the source of morality, because morality is grounded in the character of God… the moral law is a feature of God’s nature. Morality, … is ultimately grounded in the perfect nature of God." John Piippo: Naturalistic Ethics & Boiling Babies for Fun



There is no morality in science....or in reason.

Science can tell us what we can do.....but not what we should do.

 

[Agit8r]

6 .There's a straight line from the idea that science and reason are golden, are the best way to lead mankind, to the French Revolution...and "also the beginnings of modern totalitarian government and large-scale executions of "enemies of the People" by impersonal government entities (Robespierre's "Committee of Public Safety"). This legacy would not reach its fullest bloom until the tragic arrival of the German Nazis and Soviet and Chinese communists of the 20th century." French Revolution - Robespierre, and the Legacy of the Reign of Terror


a. But, examples of morality intrinsic in nature are as rare as hens teeth. What is left? "God is the source of morality, because morality is grounded in the character of God… the moral law is a feature of God’s nature. Morality, … is ultimately grounded in the perfect nature of God." John Piippo: Naturalistic Ethics & Boiling Babies for Fun



There is no morality in science....or in reason.

Science can tell us what we can do.....but not what we should do.

Perhaps you could explain why religion has caused so much suffering in its own right.

 

[PoliticalChic]

6 .There's a straight line from the idea that science and reason are golden, are the best way to lead mankind, to the French Revolution...and "also the beginnings of modern totalitarian government and large-scale executions of "enemies of the People" by impersonal government entities (Robespierre's "Committee of Public Safety"). This legacy would not reach its fullest bloom until the tragic arrival of the German Nazis and Soviet and Chinese communists of the 20th century." French Revolution - Robespierre, and the Legacy of the Reign of Terror


a. But, examples of morality intrinsic in nature are as rare as hens teeth. What is left? "God is the source of morality, because morality is grounded in the character of God… the moral law is a feature of God’s nature. Morality, … is ultimately grounded in the perfect nature of God." John Piippo: Naturalistic Ethics & Boiling Babies for Fun



There is no morality in science....or in reason.

Science can tell us what we can do.....but not what we should do.

Perhaps you could explain why religion has caused so much suffering in its own right.

View attachment 64149

1. Now....outside of your bigotry, why would you bring up an infinitesimal item like that, when you atheists have slain over 100 million in the last century alone?

a. Before the Russian Revolution, the number of execution by the czarist government came to seventeen (17) per year, according to Solzhenitsyn. He pointed out that, in comparison, the Spanish Inquisition, at its height, destroyed 10 people per month.

But, during the revolutionary years 1918-1919, Lenin's Cheka executed, without trial, more than one thousand (1,000) people a month.
At the height of Stalin's terror, 1937-1938, tens of thousands of people were shot per month. Solzhenitsyn, "Warning To The West."


b. From Solzhenitsyn's "Warning To The West,"... "Here are the figures: 17 a year, 10 a month, more than 1 ,000 a month, more than 40,000 a month! Thus, that which had made it difficult for the democratic West to form an alliance with pre-revolutionary Russia had, by 1941, grown to such an extent and still did not prevent the entire united democracy ofthe world — England, France, the United States, Canada, and other small countries — from entering into a military alliance with the Soviet Union, How is this to be explained? How can we understand it? " Full text of "Solzhenitsyn: The Voice of Freedom"



And....to bring this up in a thread exposing science's 'feet of clay'....
Just plain hatred on your part, huh?

 

[PoliticalChic]

No better and no worse.

7. Scientists are simply folks...folks like most of us, looking for a way to put bread on the table.
More often than not they will say, and 'find' what advances their status, and career.
Quite the coincidence how often 'results' of their work turn out copacetic with those paying for it.

But aren't there 'checks and balances'?
Sure...like 'peer review'.....

a. "Scholarly journal retracts 60 articles, smashes ‘peer review ring’
Every now and then a scholarly journal retracts an article because of errors or outright fraud. In academic circles, and sometimes beyond, each retraction is a big deal.

Now comes word of a journal retracting 60 articles at once.

The reason for the mass retraction is mind-blowing: A “peer review and citation ring” was apparently rigging the review process to get articles published.

You’ve heard of prostitution rings, gambling rings and extortion rings. Now there’s a “peer review ring.” Scholarly journal retracts 60 articles, smashes ‘peer review ring’



b. "Career pressure

Science is still a very strongly career-driven discipline. Scientists depend on a good reputation to receive ongoing support and funding; and a good reputation relies largely on the publication of high-profile scientific papers. Hence, there is a strong imperative to "publish or perish". Clearly, this may motivate desperate (or fame-hungry) scientists to fabricate results.

To this category may also be added a paranoia that there are other scientists out there who are close to success in the same experiment, which puts extra pressure on being the first one.

Ease of fabrication

In many scientific fields, results are often difficult to reproduce accurately, being obscured bynoise,artifacts, and other extraneousdata. That means that even if a scientist does falsify data, they can expect to get away with it – or at least claim innocence if their results conflict with others in the same field. There are no "scientific police" who are trained to fight scientific crimes; all investigations are made by experts in science but amateurs in dealing with criminals. It is relatively easy to cheat although difficult to know exactly how many scientists fabricate data."
Scientific misconduct - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Agit8r]

6 .There's a straight line from the idea that science and reason are golden, are the best way to lead mankind, to the French Revolution...and "also the beginnings of modern totalitarian government and large-scale executions of "enemies of the People" by impersonal government entities (Robespierre's "Committee of Public Safety"). This legacy would not reach its fullest bloom until the tragic arrival of the German Nazis and Soviet and Chinese communists of the 20th century." French Revolution - Robespierre, and the Legacy of the Reign of Terror


a. But, examples of morality intrinsic in nature are as rare as hens teeth. What is left? "God is the source of morality, because morality is grounded in the character of God… the moral law is a feature of God’s nature. Morality, … is ultimately grounded in the perfect nature of God." John Piippo: Naturalistic Ethics & Boiling Babies for Fun



There is no morality in science....or in reason.

Science can tell us what we can do.....but not what we should do.

Perhaps you could explain why religion has caused so much suffering in its own right.

View attachment 64149

1. Now....outside of your bigotry, why would you bring up an infinitesimal item like that, when you atheists have slain over 100 million in the last century alone?

a. Before the Russian Revolution, the number of execution by the czarist government came to seventeen (17) per year, according to Solzhenitsyn. He pointed out that, in comparison, the Spanish Inquisition, at its height, destroyed 10 people per month.

But, during the revolutionary years 1918-1919, Lenin's Cheka executed, without trial, more than one thousand (1,000) people a month.
At the height of Stalin's terror, 1937-1938, tens of thousands of people were shot per month. Solzhenitsyn, "Warning To The West."


b. From Solzhenitsyn's "Warning To The West,"... "Here are the figures: 17 a year, 10 a month, more than 1 ,000 a month, more than 40,000 a month! Thus, that which had made it difficult for the democratic West to form an alliance with pre-revolutionary Russia had, by 1941, grown to such an extent and still did not prevent the entire united democracy ofthe world — England, France, the United States, Canada, and other small countries — from entering into a military alliance with the Soviet Union, How is this to be explained? How can we understand it? " Full text of "Solzhenitsyn: The Voice of Freedom"



And....to bring this up in a thread exposing science's 'feet of clay'....
Just plain hatred on your part, huh?

It takes a religious bigot to ignore every war before the 20th century, as well as most present conflicts in the world.

 

[Agit8r]

No better and no worse.

7. Scientists are simply folks...folks like most of us, looking for a way to put bread on the table.
More often than not they will say, and 'find' what advances their status, and career.
Quite the coincidence how often 'results' of their work turn out copacetic with those paying for it.

But aren't there 'checks and balances'?
Sure...like 'peer review'.....

a. "Scholarly journal retracts 60 articles, smashes ‘peer review ring’
Every now and then a scholarly journal retracts an article because of errors or outright fraud. In academic circles, and sometimes beyond, each retraction is a big deal.

Now comes word of a journal retracting 60 articles at once.

The reason for the mass retraction is mind-blowing: A “peer review and citation ring” was apparently rigging the review process to get articles published.

You’ve heard of prostitution rings, gambling rings and extortion rings. Now there’s a “peer review ring.” Scholarly journal retracts 60 articles, smashes ‘peer review ring’



b. "Career pressure

Science is still a very strongly career-driven discipline. Scientists depend on a good reputation to receive ongoing support and funding; and a good reputation relies largely on the publication of high-profile scientific papers. Hence, there is a strong imperative to "publish or perish". Clearly, this may motivate desperate (or fame-hungry) scientists to fabricate results.

To this category may also be added a paranoia that there are other scientists out there who are close to success in the same experiment, which puts extra pressure on being the first one.

Ease of fabrication

In many scientific fields, results are often difficult to reproduce accurately, being obscured bynoise,artifacts, and other extraneousdata. That means that even if a scientist does falsify data, they can expect to get away with it – or at least claim innocence if their results conflict with others in the same field. There are no "scientific police" who are trained to fight scientific crimes; all investigations are made by experts in science but amateurs in dealing with criminals. It is relatively easy to cheat although difficult to know exactly how many scientists fabricate data."
Scientific misconduct - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are plenty of places in the world where luddites such as yourself can go live in squalor. Have at it. Leave the civilized world to those of us who have evolved into fully modern humans.

 

[PoliticalChic]

6 .There's a straight line from the idea that science and reason are golden, are the best way to lead mankind, to the French Revolution...and "also the beginnings of modern totalitarian government and large-scale executions of "enemies of the People" by impersonal government entities (Robespierre's "Committee of Public Safety"). This legacy would not reach its fullest bloom until the tragic arrival of the German Nazis and Soviet and Chinese communists of the 20th century." French Revolution - Robespierre, and the Legacy of the Reign of Terror


a. But, examples of morality intrinsic in nature are as rare as hens teeth. What is left? "God is the source of morality, because morality is grounded in the character of God… the moral law is a feature of God’s nature. Morality, … is ultimately grounded in the perfect nature of God." John Piippo: Naturalistic Ethics & Boiling Babies for Fun



There is no morality in science....or in reason.

Science can tell us what we can do.....but not what we should do.

Perhaps you could explain why religion has caused so much suffering in its own right.

View attachment 64149

1. Now....outside of your bigotry, why would you bring up an infinitesimal item like that, when you atheists have slain over 100 million in the last century alone?

a. Before the Russian Revolution, the number of execution by the czarist government came to seventeen (17) per year, according to Solzhenitsyn. He pointed out that, in comparison, the Spanish Inquisition, at its height, destroyed 10 people per month.

But, during the revolutionary years 1918-1919, Lenin's Cheka executed, without trial, more than one thousand (1,000) people a month.
At the height of Stalin's terror, 1937-1938, tens of thousands of people were shot per month. Solzhenitsyn, "Warning To The West."


b. From Solzhenitsyn's "Warning To The West,"... "Here are the figures: 17 a year, 10 a month, more than 1 ,000 a month, more than 40,000 a month! Thus, that which had made it difficult for the democratic West to form an alliance with pre-revolutionary Russia had, by 1941, grown to such an extent and still did not prevent the entire united democracy ofthe world — England, France, the United States, Canada, and other small countries — from entering into a military alliance with the Soviet Union, How is this to be explained? How can we understand it? " Full text of "Solzhenitsyn: The Voice of Freedom"



And....to bring this up in a thread exposing science's 'feet of clay'....
Just plain hatred on your part, huh?

It takes a religious bigot to ignore every war before the 20th century, as well as most present conflicts in the world.

How about you back up the suggestion.....the basis of your bigotry....

Like this:
Stalin....42,672,000

Mao.....37,828,000

Hitler....20,946,000

Lenin....4,017,000

Pol Pot...2,397,000

Tojo.....3,990,000

Total......111,850,000

#14 Liberal Demagoguery, Hate and Violence - A Compendium



Versus this....
The total number of deaths estimated to lie at the feet of humanity's poor practice of Christianity is approximately 17 million.This number would include ancient wars, the Crusades, theInquisitions, various European wars during the Middle Ages, and witchcraft trials.
Isn't religion to blame for most of history's killings?


You bring this red herring up in a thread about what science is...and I bury you.
Feel pretty stupid, huh?

 

[PoliticalChic]

No better and no worse.

7. Scientists are simply folks...folks like most of us, looking for a way to put bread on the table.
More often than not they will say, and 'find' what advances their status, and career.
Quite the coincidence how often 'results' of their work turn out copacetic with those paying for it.

But aren't there 'checks and balances'?
Sure...like 'peer review'.....

a. "Scholarly journal retracts 60 articles, smashes ‘peer review ring’
Every now and then a scholarly journal retracts an article because of errors or outright fraud. In academic circles, and sometimes beyond, each retraction is a big deal.

Now comes word of a journal retracting 60 articles at once.

The reason for the mass retraction is mind-blowing: A “peer review and citation ring” was apparently rigging the review process to get articles published.

You’ve heard of prostitution rings, gambling rings and extortion rings. Now there’s a “peer review ring.” Scholarly journal retracts 60 articles, smashes ‘peer review ring’



b. "Career pressure

Science is still a very strongly career-driven discipline. Scientists depend on a good reputation to receive ongoing support and funding; and a good reputation relies largely on the publication of high-profile scientific papers. Hence, there is a strong imperative to "publish or perish". Clearly, this may motivate desperate (or fame-hungry) scientists to fabricate results.

To this category may also be added a paranoia that there are other scientists out there who are close to success in the same experiment, which puts extra pressure on being the first one.

Ease of fabrication

In many scientific fields, results are often difficult to reproduce accurately, being obscured bynoise,artifacts, and other extraneousdata. That means that even if a scientist does falsify data, they can expect to get away with it – or at least claim innocence if their results conflict with others in the same field. There are no "scientific police" who are trained to fight scientific crimes; all investigations are made by experts in science but amateurs in dealing with criminals. It is relatively easy to cheat although difficult to know exactly how many scientists fabricate data."
Scientific misconduct - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are plenty of places in the world where luddites such as yourself can go live in squalor. Have at it. Leave the civilized world to those of us who have evolved into fully modern humans.

What a typically vapid post by a Liberal.

Rather than try to attempt to discredit, dispute, or rebut anything in my posts....you post something along the lines of 'oh, yeah....sez you!!!'

Pretty much the Liberal version of a white flag....an admission that my posts are irrefutable.

 

[dilloduck]

I'm trying to remember what religion Genghis Khan followed ....hmm

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm trying to remember what religion Genghis Khan followed ....hmm

I believe you might find part of the answer in here....

First World War (1914–18): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 million
Russian Civil War (1917–22): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 million
Soviet Union, Stalin’s regime (1924–53): . . . . . . . . . 20 million
Second World War (1937–45): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 million
Chinese Civil War (1945–49): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5 million
People’s Republic of China, Mao Zedong’s
regime (1949–75): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 million
Tibet (1950 et seq.): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600,000
Congo Free State (1886–1908): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 million
Mexico (1910–20): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 million
Turkish massacres of Armenians (1915–23): . . . . . 1.5 million
China (1917–28): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 800,000
China, Nationalist era (1928–37): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 million
Korean War (1950–53): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.8 million
North Korea (1948 et seq.): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 million
Rwanda and Burundi (1959–95): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.35 million
Second Indochina War (1960–75): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 million
Ethiopia (1962–92): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400,000
Nigeria (1966–70): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 million
Bangladesh (1971): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.25 million
Cambodia, Khmer Rouge (1975–78): . . . . . . . . . . . 1.65 million
Mozambique (1975–92): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 million
Afghanistan (1979–2001): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.8 million
Iran–Iraq War (1980–88): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 million
Sudan (1983 et seq.): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.9 million
Kinshasa, Congo (1998 et seq.): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.8 million
Philippines Insurgency (1899–1902): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220,000
Brazil (1900 et seq.): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500,000
Amazonia (1900–1912): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250,000
Portuguese colonies (1900–1925): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325,000
French colonies (1900–1940): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200,000
Japanese War (1904–5): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130,000
German East Africa (1905–7): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175,000
Libya (1911–31): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125,000
Balkan Wars (1912–13): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140,000
Greco–Turkish War (1919–22): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250,000
Spanish Civil War (1936–39): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365,000
Franco Regime (1939–75): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,000
Abyssinian Conquest (1935–41): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400,000
Finnish War (1939–40): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,000
Greek Civil War (1943–49): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158,000
Yugoslavia, Tito’s regime (1944–80): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200,000
First Indochina War (1945–54): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400,000
Colombia (1946–58): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200,000
India (1947): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500,000
Romania (1948–89): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,000
Burma/Myanmar (1948 et seq.): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130,000
Algeria (1954–62): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 537,000
Sudan (1955–72): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500,000
Guatemala (1960–96): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200,000
Indonesia (1965–66): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400,000
Uganda, Idi Amin’s regime (1972–79): . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300,000
Vietnam, postwar Communist regime
(1975 et seq.): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430,000
Angola (1975–2002): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 550,000
East Timor, conquest by Indonesia (1975–99): . . . . . 200,000
Lebanon (1975–90): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,000
Cambodian Civil War (1978–91): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225,000
Iraq, Saddam Hussein (1979–2003): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300,000
Uganda (1979–86): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300,000
Kurdistan (1980s, 1990s): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300,000
Liberia (1989–97): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,000
Iraq (1990– ): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350,000
Bosnia and Herzegovina (1992–95): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175,000
Somalia (1991 et seq.): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400,000
From "The Devil's Delusion," Berlinski


Somehow, dopes such as the example earlier in the thread answer any criticism of science with bogus attacks on religion....

1. In 2007, physicist Steven Weinberg addressed the “Beyond Belief: Science, Religion, Reason, and Survival” conference. This Nobel Prize winner claimed “Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.” He was warmly applauded.

a. What was the religious provenance of poison gas, barbed wire, high explosives, experiments in eugenics, Zyklon B, heavy artillery, napalm, nuclear weapons?
Berlinski, Op. Cit.


I put much of the blame on the secular milieu and Liberal control of 'education.'

 

[PoliticalChic]

Scientists generally 'find' what they wish to find.


8. And, of course there are serious political motives for scientists who value career advancement, too. Just ask yourself which political perspective controls the institutions of academia, and the vast majority of economic resources.

And note how frequently scientists' result support Liberal endeavors.


Produce results that run counter to Liberal doctrine...and one can lose grants...or employment.


a. When Chinese paleontologist Jun-Yuan Chen’s criticism of Darwinian predictions about the fossil record was met with dead silence from a group of scientists in the U.S., he quipped that, “In China we can criticize Darwin, but not the government; in America you can criticize the government, but not Darwin.”
Communities — Voices and Insights - Washington Times




9. There is that statement about Liberals, along the line of "as soon as they hear 'studies show,' Liberals snap to attention."

They've been trained to follow orders and government decrees., and any who question are deemed, as was inserted into Soviet jurisprudence, 'enemies of the people.'

Today we find....largely on the Left, and among government school grads,....a propensity not to question, or challenge- to simply accept...this is.the result of what passes for 'education' in said precincts.....


Careful analysis and evaluation of what we are told falls by the wayside, 'else much of governments edicts would be questioned......and rejected.

 

[mamooth]

PC's goal is to beat the body counts of Hitler and Stalin, her spiritual mentors. That's why she's so fixated with the numbers and methods.

 

[PoliticalChic]

PC's goal is to beat the body counts of Hitler and Stalin, her spiritual mentors. That's why she's so fixated with the numbers and methods.

Funny.....I posted this tread as a cautionary tale, warning that there are too many brain-dead Liberal drones who attribute super human qualities to 'scientists'...
... the sort we call 'a reliable Democrat voter.'


...and you are exactly the sort of troglodyte I had in mind.



Thanks so much for showing up as 'exhibit A.'

 

[mamooth]

So was it the voice of Hitler or Stalin that told you to post that?

 

[PoliticalChic]

So was it the voice of Hitler or Stalin that told you to post that?

Do you imagine....I almost said 'think,' then remembered to whom this post was directed...that any one believes that I have any affinity for any totalitarian dictator?

Liberals, Nazis, fascists, communists, progressives, socialists...
I must have posted dozens of threads rich with contumely for each.

So...your post is simply an unimaginative version of 'I hate you.'

Can't begin to tell you how deeply hurt I am.


Write soon, y'hear.

 

[mamooth]

Got it. Adolf and Josef were singing a duet in your head.