Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
“If you believe that government has no right to intrude upon the exercise of your individual will, that you have a moral duty to be virtuous, that human beings are capable of bettering the world through the use of reason, you are a product of Jerusalem and Athens.”
Ben Shapiro, “The Right Side Of History.”
How many soldiers did governments intrude upon, or should I say Impress upon, to fight in their wars?
Ben is such a sappy guy and he can believe he wants, but facts are facts, they can and they do. Did you register for the draft?
“If you believe that government has no right to intrude upon the exercise of your individual will, that you have a moral duty to be virtuous, that human beings are capable of bettering the world through the use of reason, you are a product of Jerusalem and Athens.”
Ben Shapiro, “The Right Side Of History.”
Objective reality disagrees with Ben.
www.nysun.com
www.wnd.com
Here is the context for this thread:
We’ve built western civilization on two pillars: God created every human in His image and human beings are able to investigate and make rational conclusions about the world. These two ideas were born in Jerusalem and Athens, respectively.
“If you believe that government has no right to intrude upon the exercise of your individual will, that you have a moral duty to be virtuous, that human beings are capable of bettering the world through the use of reason, you are a product of Jerusalem and Athens.”
Ben Shapiro, “The Right Side Of History.”
The Left/Democrats/Progressives have pretty much ended the impact of religion…..and now they are doing the same with science: they plan to end it in the name of diversity and inclusion.
1.I have usually formulated the difference between the Left and the Right as being based on the primacy of the collective, versus the individual. The Founders, and conservatives today, choosing the latter. But an interesting essay by the brilliant Heather MacDonald presents this conundrum: is there any future for Western Civilization if we no longer strive for excellence?
2. In “Unscientific Method,” Scientific Merit and the "Equity" Cult | City Journal MacDonald relates the story of a scientist whose work was ‘erased’ because it valued merit over diversity.
“…astronomer John Kormendy withdrew an article from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), after a preprint version that he had just posted on the web drew sharp criticism for threatening the conduct of “inclusive” science. … the preprint version was scrubbed as well (though a PDF can still be found here.)
3. What was so hurtful in his article? Kormendy had aimed to reduce the role of individual subjectivity in scientific hiring and tenure decisions. He created a model that predicted a scientist’s long-term research impact from the citation history of his early publications. He tested the results of his model against a panel of 22 prestigious astronomers, many of whom had advised the federal government on scientific research priorities and had served as jurors on high-profile astronomy prizes. That panel rated the research impact of the 512 astronomers whom Kormendy had run through his model; the panel’s conclusions closely matched the model’s results.
4. In 2021, a different standard for evaluating ideas applies: Do they help or hinder females and underrepresented minorities in STEM? Kormendy’s model, tweeted an astrophysicist at the City University of New York, “JUST TOOK ANY TINY STEPS WE ARE MAKING TOWARDS EQUITY AND THREW THEM OUT OF THE WINDOW” (capitalization in the original). An astronomer in Budapest objected that Kormendy had failed to consult with “relevant humanities experts” about cumulative bias against females and minorities.
5. But that non-representation was exactly the point—scientific expertise is not democratic.”
One can only wonder if Democrat voters have ever considered that their vote constitutes agreement with the idea that gender or skin color should determine which members of the science community should advance, and why.
And....can we still refer to the endeavor as 'science'????
And where any of those voters taken aback in 2009 when the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded on the basis of skin color?
www.nobelprize.org
"Medical research risks credibility with adoption of 'racism' standards
LaVeist’s experience illustrates the dramatic transformation in medical research, accelerating in the past few years. While few would dispute that black Americans are more prone to chronic health problems and have shorter life expectancies than whites, the medical community generally sought answers in biology, genetics and lifestyle. Research, like LaVeist’s, that focused on racism was frowned upon as lacking rigor or relevance, an amateurish detour from serious intellectual inquiry.
Today medical journal editors are clamoring for a racial lens and apologizing for what they call their past moral blindness. In recent years, and especially since Black Lives Matter protests erupted last year, systemic racism has been transformed from a fringe theory to a canonical truth.
Medical researchers are now able to offer a sweeping socio-political explanation for racial health disparities by citing the hundreds of peer-reviewed articles authored by LaVeist and a host of others, thus conferring upon the study of systemic racism the imprimatur of scholarly authority and even settled science."
Medical research risks credibility with adoption of 'racism' standards | WND | by Around the Web
Rejection used to be common for medical sociologist Thomas LaVeist when he tried to get his research published on the effects of racism on the health of black people. “Now,” said the 60-year-old dean of Tulane University’s School of Public Health & Tropical Medicine, “I have those same journals...
The reduction of race and gender bias in clinical treatment recommendations using clinician peer networks in an experimental setting - Nature Communications
Race and gender bias in healthcare contribute to health disparities. Here the authors show in an experimental setting that structured information sharing networks among clinicians can reduce race and gender bias in medical decisions.www.nature.com
Clearly, Marxism has extended its reach to what used to be called science.
www.medicalnewstoday.com
journals.lww.com
www.nature.com
bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com
The thousands banned from Twaffler, YouTube, and Fasciustbook for expressing opinions different from fascist cranks like you are unavailable for comment.Log Cabin constituency.
liberalism is
- willingness to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; openness to new ideas.
The political prisoners being held in the Washington D.C. gulag are unavailable for comment.2. a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.
Yup. Dr. Malone, who helped developed the mRna, spoke of the dangers of the vaccine to children, and his Twitter account was suspended.The thousands banned from Twaffler, YouTube, and Fasciustbook for expressing opinions different from fascist cranks like you are unavailable for comment.
The political prisoners being held in the Washington D.C. gulag are unavailable for comment.
You, sir, are an intellectual fraud and moral coward of titanic proportions.
Morality is subjective and neither you nor Benny can objectively prove God exists.Here is the context for this thread:
We’ve built western civilization on two pillars: God created every human in His image and human beings are able to investigate and make rational conclusions about the world. These two ideas were born in Jerusalem and Athens, respectively.
“If you believe that government has no right to intrude upon the exercise of your individual will, that you have a moral duty to be virtuous, that human beings are capable of bettering the world through the use of reason, you are a product of Jerusalem and Athens.”
Ben Shapiro, “The Right Side Of History.”
Immediate derail of a thread. You are a total loser.306-232. Objective Trump lost.
Trump's Big Lie. Subjective. Your cult leader said it so you must believe it.
Immediate derail of a thread. You are a total loser.
Why is this drivel in the politics section?
Nobody was taken aback by the awarding of the Nobel Peace Price in 2009, because nobody, except Donald Trump, gives a rat's ass who won the Nobel Peace Prize. The list of winners is long and, quite frankly, bizarre, but there is something about Barrack Obama's win that makes Republicans bat shit crazy.
This is the 2008 winner:
"Martti Ahtisaari for his important efforts, on several continents and over more than three decades, to resolve international conflicts”
Here is the whole list of winners.
Crash course – 2023 Nobel Prizes
How much do you know about the discoveries awarded the 2023 Nobel Prizes? Take our one-minute crash course on each of the prizes and find out how each have changed […]
It's been 12 years since Obama got the Nobel Peace Prize. His selected was no more out of line than any of their other choices but for some reason, you go nuts about this, or any other accolade given to one of the best Presidents the USA has had in my lifetime.
It makes you look petty and hateful, which of course you are.
Morality is subjective and neither you nor Benny can objectively prove God exists.
Immediate derail of a thread. You are a total loser.
I figured your response would be a dodge. So much for your ability to reason.But......you have proven this.
You know who isn't? Biden...306 electoral votes baby!!!!
