Democrats Have a Problem With Science, Too

[Erand7899]

The science on GMO is not indisputable like it is on GW or evolution, or vaccines...

Francnbeans, all scientific theories are disputable. They are after all theories. Seems liberals think the word science is a magic bullet debate stopper. It isn't.

And there we have it folks. The belief that scientists just make up theories out of thin air and no research is done.

Basicaill KWC believes there is no right or wrong, no possible or impossible when it comes to science. Its all a toss up Gotta be a blond

And there you have it folks. Ignorance proudly on display.

Science uses specialized terms that have different meanings than everyday usage. These definitions correspond to the way scientists typically use these terms in the context of their work. Note, especially, that the meaning of “theory” in science is different than the meaning of “theory” in everyday conversation. •Fact: In science, an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as “true.” Truth in science, however, is never final and what is accepted as a fact today may be modified or even discarded tomorrow.
•Hypothesis: A tentative statement about the natural world leading to deductions that can be tested. If the deductions are verified, the hypothesis is provisionally corroborated. If the deductions are incorrect, the original hypothesis is proved false and must be abandoned or modified. Hypotheses can be used to build more complex inferences and explanations.
•Law: A descriptive generalization about how some aspect of the natural world behaves under stated circumstances.
•Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses.Definitions of Fact, Theory, and Law in Scientific Work | NCSE

Theory is based on facts, but it is not fact. It is an intelligent explanation of the known facts, that holds up under testing, and explains all phenomena associated with the subject.

It is an interpretation of the facts, and the interpretation is open to disagreement about what the known facts substantiate. It starts with a hypothesis, which is one interpretation of the facts. Others offer antitheses to the original hypothesis, and so the system goes until most are satisfied that the modified hypothesis is an acceptable explanation. There may well be many acceptable explanations to any set of facts. Newly discovered facts may well destroy a theory or cause major revision.

All scientific theories are constantly being questioned by experts in the field, and should never be considered as more than a reasonable explanation.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No he said all scientific theories are disputable. As if theories are just made up out of thin air and he, knowing shit about how they form these theories believes that he is in a position to question any and all theories based on his ignorance. There is no such thing as possible or impossible because all theories are disputable! Can we travel in time? SURE and NO! Can I put my head on a robot body? YES and NO!

Who knows? /sarcasm

All theories are disputable, that does not mean they are made up out of thin air. Then again, you think a study done by a guy who ignores science trumps actual scientific studies, so there is really no way to reason with you.

Not by people who have no idea and make false claims about a worldwide conspiracy. Everything is disputable means there is no right or wrong, no possible or impossible it can all be possible!

Shark Soldiers! Sure! We live in cartoon land

Does that include you and your worldwide conspiracy to sell unsafe food? There are, literally, thousands of studies that show that GMOs are safe. We have been eating them for thousands of years, yet, suddenly, I am supposed to think that we have been poisoning our sleeves all that time, even though life expectancy has gone up. You came up with 10 studies that are so bad you don't even use the word scientific to describe them, I have 600 scientific studies that contradict those 10.

GMO Pundit a.k.a. David Tribe: 600+ published safety assessments

Every major scientific group says they are safe. The evidence in support of GMO safety is as conclusive as the evidence for climate change.

I even have a pretty picture for the people that have challenges reading actual words.

But, please, keep telling me how smart you are and how stupid I am, it amuses me.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Francnbeans, all scientific theories are disputable. They are after all theories. Seems liberals think the word science is a magic bullet debate stopper. It isn't.

And there we have it folks. The belief that scientists just make up theories out of thin air and no research is done.

Basicaill KWC believes there is no right or wrong, no possible or impossible when it comes to science. Its all a toss up Gotta be a blond

And there you have it folks. Ignorance proudly on display.

Science uses specialized terms that have different meanings than everyday usage. These definitions correspond to the way scientists typically use these terms in the context of their work. Note, especially, that the meaning of “theory” in science is different than the meaning of “theory” in everyday conversation. •Fact: In science, an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as “true.” Truth in science, however, is never final and what is accepted as a fact today may be modified or even discarded tomorrow.
•Hypothesis: A tentative statement about the natural world leading to deductions that can be tested. If the deductions are verified, the hypothesis is provisionally corroborated. If the deductions are incorrect, the original hypothesis is proved false and must be abandoned or modified. Hypotheses can be used to build more complex inferences and explanations.
•Law: A descriptive generalization about how some aspect of the natural world behaves under stated circumstances.
•Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses.Definitions of Fact, Theory, and Law in Scientific Work | NCSE

Theory is based on facts, but it is not fact. It is an intelligent explanation of the known facts, that holds up under testing, and explains all phenomena associated with the subject.

It is an interpretation of the facts, and the interpretation is open to disagreement about what the known facts substantiate. It starts with a hypothesis, which is one interpretation of the facts. Others offer antitheses to the original hypothesis, and so the system goes until most are satisfied that the modified hypothesis is an acceptable explanation. There may well be many acceptable explanations to any set of facts. Newly discovered facts may well destroy a theory or cause major revision.

All scientific theories are constantly being questioned by experts in the field, and should never be considered as more than a reasonable explanation.

Exactly, not by asshats on the internet who question everything from a position of ignorance

It is an intelligent explanation of the known facts, that holds up under testing, and explains all phenomena associated with the subject.

Thanks again.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So instead of proving your point about made up science you decide instead to find info about something completely unrelated and claim you dont have the time to find information related to the topic

Cool story bro

Are you stupid?

Read the paper. It is a PEER REVIEWED study that demonstrates opposition to GMO's is a cultural fad that defies availible scientific research.

Lets review.

You Claim scientific research doesnt exists
I post scientific research complete with links to all reports
You claim its conspiracy without explanation
I post the question how is it false?
You respond that you dont have time to say
BUT you do have time to post a pdf to something unrealted
I'll post another link.

You'll wash and repeat your previous actions

No scientific consensus on GMO safety

Annnnd Action....

Wrong, I made that claim, and you linked to a whackadoodle site with fake studies. You then tried to claim I said that there were no studies, and kept repeating that lie for post after post.

You lost.

 

[ClosedCaption]

You just ignored another link. I guess every site is wacka doodle then

 

[kwc57]

I must be psychic

psychotic.........there, I fixed it for you.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You just ignored another link. I guess every site is wacka doodle then

If you are talking about me and the link you posted for The European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility, you are right about it being a whackadoodle site. Did you know that they insist that plants be treated ethically? Then burn down fields full of GMO plants?

Seriously dude, get a brain.

 

[kwc57]

Francnbeans, all scientific theories are disputable. They are after all theories. Seems liberals think the word science is a magic bullet debate stopper. It isn't.

And there we have it folks. The belief that scientists just make up theories out of thin air and no research is done.

Basicaill KWC believes there is no right or wrong, no possible or impossible when it comes to science. Its all a toss up Gotta be a blond

And there you have it folks. Ignorance proudly on display.

Science uses specialized terms that have different meanings than everyday usage. These definitions correspond to the way scientists typically use these terms in the context of their work. Note, especially, that the meaning of “theory” in science is different than the meaning of “theory” in everyday conversation. •Fact: In science, an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as “true.” Truth in science, however, is never final and what is accepted as a fact today may be modified or even discarded tomorrow.
•Hypothesis: A tentative statement about the natural world leading to deductions that can be tested. If the deductions are verified, the hypothesis is provisionally corroborated. If the deductions are incorrect, the original hypothesis is proved false and must be abandoned or modified. Hypotheses can be used to build more complex inferences and explanations.
•Law: A descriptive generalization about how some aspect of the natural world behaves under stated circumstances.
•Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses.Definitions of Fact, Theory, and Law in Scientific Work | NCSE

Theory is based on facts, but it is not fact. It is an intelligent explanation of the known facts, that holds up under testing, and explains all phenomena associated with the subject.

It is an interpretation of the facts, and the interpretation is open to disagreement about what the known facts substantiate. It starts with a hypothesis, which is one interpretation of the facts. Others offer antitheses to the original hypothesis, and so the system goes until most are satisfied that the modified hypothesis is an acceptable explanation. There may well be many acceptable explanations to any set of facts. Newly discovered facts may well destroy a theory or cause major revision.

All scientific theories are constantly being questioned by experts in the field, and should never be considered as more than a reasonable explanation.

Save yourself some time and don't bother trying to educate him. His reading comprehension is impaired by his ideology. It's just as effective to point and laugh and him and call him names. It's all the village idiot deserves at this point.

 

[Erand7899]

And there we have it folks. The belief that scientists just make up theories out of thin air and no research is done.

Basicaill KWC believes there is no right or wrong, no possible or impossible when it comes to science. Its all a toss up Gotta be a blond

And there you have it folks. Ignorance proudly on display.

Science uses specialized terms that have different meanings than everyday usage. These definitions correspond to the way scientists typically use these terms in the context of their work. Note, especially, that the meaning of “theory” in science is different than the meaning of “theory” in everyday conversation. •Fact: In science, an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as “true.” Truth in science, however, is never final and what is accepted as a fact today may be modified or even discarded tomorrow.
•Hypothesis: A tentative statement about the natural world leading to deductions that can be tested. If the deductions are verified, the hypothesis is provisionally corroborated. If the deductions are incorrect, the original hypothesis is proved false and must be abandoned or modified. Hypotheses can be used to build more complex inferences and explanations.
•Law: A descriptive generalization about how some aspect of the natural world behaves under stated circumstances.
•Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses.Definitions of Fact, Theory, and Law in Scientific Work | NCSE

Theory is based on facts, but it is not fact. It is an intelligent explanation of the known facts, that holds up under testing, and explains all phenomena associated with the subject.

It is an interpretation of the facts, and the interpretation is open to disagreement about what the known facts substantiate. It starts with a hypothesis, which is one interpretation of the facts. Others offer antitheses to the original hypothesis, and so the system goes until most are satisfied that the modified hypothesis is an acceptable explanation. There may well be many acceptable explanations to any set of facts. Newly discovered facts may well destroy a theory or cause major revision.

All scientific theories are constantly being questioned by experts in the field, and should never be considered as more than a reasonable explanation.

Exactly, not by asshats on the internet who question everything from a position of ignorance

It is an intelligent explanation of the known facts, that holds up under testing, and explains all phenomena associated with the subject.

Thanks again.

Nice try, but everyone has a right to question scientific theories. Nor, is it just asshats on the internet who are questioning these theories.

Ignorant loons believe that siding with the prevailing political and scientific thought, gives them an air of intellectual superiority, and it is easy to find literature to support their "borrowed" intelligence. When they find that running thin, they always fall back on the "You don't believe in science." bomb, or the all to familiar "You are against him because he is Black" bomb.

Almost enough facts to construct a theory on left wing ignorance.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You just ignored another link. I guess every site is wacka doodle then

About a decade ago, I stopped any serious debate of AGW. I recognized that my opponents were zealots with no grasp at all of the scientific method, no understanding of the concepts of evidence, supported assertions, foundational logic - you know, all the stuff that makes real science work.

I assumed that the desire for profits from suckers made the AGW morons pervert science to promote the con.

But I see here that the same lack of any semblance of scientific thought permeates your posts here - it isn't that you have no grasp of science because your fucknut religion has corrupted your ability to reason, it's that you are drawn to the AGW religion precisely BECAUSE you are unable to reason. Science is a process of discovery, a methodology to ferret out the truth - you are precluded from this because you lack the reasoning skills requisite to follow the scientific method.