Republicans Against Science: Boast Willful Ignorance as their Trademark

[Midway ®]

"The sun has more effect on Earth's temperature than man does." 

Not sure what this has to do with the present climate change discussion though...

Of course the sun has more effect on the Earth's temperature than man does. The Sun has a mass of over 300,000 times that of Earth, and has a surface temperature of over 5000 degrees C. It accounts for 99% of the total mass of the solar system. Without the sun the Earth's temperature would be about -400 degrees.

But that's not the point.

The Earth's climate depends upon a very delicate balance of numerous factors to maintain the temperature within an extremely narrow range in order to maintain the climate as we know it.

So while in the huge view the Sun has much more effect on the earth than humans do, it does not take a very hard push from those humans to totally screw things up in an irreversible way that will cause great world wide problems, mostly in food production. When this happens, it will already be too late.

Sorry, Jandar, your contentions vis a vis cyclic variations in the Sun's output of various forms of radiation does not really make sense within the context of the climate change discussion.

And actually, CERN did not "invent" the internet. They merely used TCP/IP to connect their facilities internally, forming CERNET. The most relevant ancestor of the internet was ARPANET.

[ronchamblin]

Global warming?  Does it matter if we have gone past the tipping point?  It is important I suppose, but not extremely in my view.  Given the current state of affairs, wherein so many of our fellow humans seem to be drifting toward a mass insanity, offering so many untruths from all points of the compass, and engaging in so many stupidities, absurdities, and corruptions, and being indifferent to those who are suffering injustices at the hands of those in power or of those in positions of privilege â€" I consider it unimportant to wish upon the earth our continued existence.  Do we, as compared to the other animals, have a special privilege to live; that is, as a species?

Just as it is possible, tolerable, and ultimately inevitable, for one individual to die, as it happens every second; it is also possible, and quite tolerable, for all humans to die, leaving none alive on earth; whether from some calamity or by human action or inaction, thereby leaving the current collection of animals just as they were before our species spoiled their Eden with our inclinations for the mean and atrocious behaviors only humans can perform.

I suggest that there is a small percentage of humans who do exhibit sufficient admirable attributes of behavior so that they would surely prove able to maintain acceptable habitation on the earth, including the discipline to avoid spoiling the earth; but the problem is that their number is far overcome by the weight of the stupidity and ignorance of the gross majority, those exhibiting the beastly behaviors, and indifference to all that is good and of integrity.

Therefore I must offer my opinion that I do not see any regret or fear whatever if each of us, all humans on earth, were to be brought to the condition of death by whatever means, even as from old age or of catastrophe, as we would be only one species of many that has been doomed to extinction for eternity.  Who are we, as a species, to believe that we are so special that we must have eternal existence?  What does it matter?  And to whom does it matter?

In any case, if all humans were removed from earth by global warming, from too many nuclear bomb explosions, or by way of a large asteroid, a new human type species would evolve in similar form in several million years to have another chance to be good on earth, and to be good “to” the earth, because the current primate population will evolve to accomplish a similar intelligence as ours.

Of course, if the primates do not survive, and only the smaller more primitive mammals do, then the earth might be fortunate to be without a similar human presence for many more millions of years; thus giving the earth and the other animals a greater age of peace and tranquility, a longer period without the pollutions, insanities, cruelties, and beastly behaviors as exhibited by human types.

To digress, it is highly probable that the laws of the universe, being stable and sure, will cause any future human types to approximate our physical shape, and our mental abilities.  These same laws will insure the evolution of the same technologies, the same sciences, and the same psychological dynamics, and thus, the same religions, and the wars about them.

And too, it may be that our entire earth, by way of a large collision, will be destroyed completely.  And this, again in my view, would be of little consequence.  Why does it matter?  To whom does it matter?  We came from the rocks of the universe.  And to the rocks we shall return.   So, really, why all the fuss about global warming.  Individual death is of no concern, as it has happened to every individual ever born, and will happen to every individual who is now alive.  It is the individual suffering we should be concerned about in the here and now, not only for our fellow humans, but also for our wild creatures.  What creature intentionally causes, or allows by indifference, suffering to other creatures, even to his own species?  Do humans really deserve any special place in the scheme of things….. such as continued existence as a species?   

[buckethead]

http://www.youtube.com/v/MLNH1ULIKIU&feature=related

[Midway ®]

Ronchamblin,

That was a pretty garden variety 25 cent manifesto of existential nihilism.

Don't you have any kids?

If you are searching for the meaning of life, I can provide that answer for you.

[ronchamblin]

Ronchamblin,

That was a pretty garden variety 25 cent manifesto of existential nihilism.

Don't you have any kids?

If you are searching for the meaning of life, I can provide that answer for you.

Actually my intention was to keep my post to a certain level.  But… yes, absolutely.  There is no purpose or ultimate meaning to life.  We humans are as the animals, as the ants, as the plants, and ultimately, as the rocks.  We are the consequences of the laws of the universe.  However, we humans have the ability to work, to build,  to dream, to philosophize, to love, to have compassion, to forgive, to create, to be responsible, and the obligation to be rational.   

So……….. what do you propose to provide me?

[Midway ®]

The meaning of life:

Life is a consequence of the complexity of carbon chemistry.

[ronchamblin]

Thank goodness Midway.  I thought your were going to suggest a visit to the FBC so that I might discover the meaning of life.  Whew !!

[buckethead]

You both just missed the meaning of life, which is readily contained within the screenplay of The Royal Tenenbaums:

Royal: Richie, this illness, this closeness to death... it's had a profound affect on me. I feel like a different person, I really do.
Richie: Dad, you were never dying.
Royal: ...but I'm gonna live

[ronchamblin]

I get your drift Bucket, as there is some truth in it.   Actually, I don’t know about you but I’ve always been uncomfortable with the question:  “What is the meaning of life”.  To me it’s one of those nonsense questions, wherein there are valid words, but their assembly forms nonsense.   

Perhaps the word “purpose” would make more sense, but then I would also have difficulty in answering that question too.  “What is the purpose of life?”  Life in general, in my view does not have, nor does it have to have, a meaning or a purpose.  We, as individuals have the very important purpose to survive as an individual.  But then the word “objective” might be better in this case.   â€œWhat is the objective of life?”  The objective is to perpetuate one’s existence as an individual.  One might conclude also that in conjunction with one’s fellow humans, one’s objective is to perpetuate the existence of the species.   

And of course, one might suggest that one’s “objective” as an individual is to live, as one is able, to the fullest of one’s life, and in harmony with one’s fellow creatures.  But… “meaning of life?”…. “purpose of life?”.  These two terms imply that some entity placed humans on earth for some purpose or for some meaning.  And in my view, this fiction is simply nonsense, generated thousands of years ago in the era of mankind’s love of superstition, is overdue for the trash, and perpetuated even now by individuals who, in some way benefit; perpetuated by habits of thought and cultural momentums which not only suffocates learning and rational thought, but perpetuates conditions that promotes the conflicts and wars we endure even to the moment of this writing.

[urbanlibertarian]

The Chicago Tribune's libertarian leaning Steve Chapman calls out conservatives for doing what environmental alarmists have often done.  Ignoring science.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-0901-chapman-20110901,0,1332482.column

Over and over, we saw a pattern. Environmental and public health groups with a leftward bent said the sky was falling; conservatives and libertarians (me included) asked for scientific evidence; and the science sooner or later debunked the fears.

Back then, those skeptical about environmental warnings deferred to learned people who knew the subject best. Alarmists stoutly ignored them while scrounging up a few experts who would take their side.

But that was another century. Today, it's scientists who agree on the validity of a major environmental peril â€" climate change caused by human activity. It's liberals and environmentalists who can point to a broad scholarly consensus for their claims. And it's the skeptics who now revile the scientists as stooges and liars.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry is right in step with many conservative advocacy groups and commentators when he derides global warming as "all one contrived phony mess that is falling apart under its own weight." The conservative magazine National Review regularly heaps scorn on climate-change worries.

Whole column here: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-0901-chapman-20110901,0,1332482.column

[FayeforCure]

The Chicago Tribune's libertarian leaning Steve Chapman calls out conservatives for doing what environmental alarmists have often done.  Ignoring science.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-0901-chapman-20110901,0,1332482.column

Over and over, we saw a pattern. Environmental and public health groups with a leftward bent said the sky was falling; conservatives and libertarians (me included) asked for scientific evidence; and the science sooner or later debunked the fears.

Back then, those skeptical about environmental warnings deferred to learned people who knew the subject best. Alarmists stoutly ignored them while scrounging up a few experts who would take their side.

But that was another century. Today, it's scientists who agree on the validity of a major environmental peril â€" climate change caused by human activity. It's liberals and environmentalists who can point to a broad scholarly consensus for their claims. And it's the skeptics who now revile the scientists as stooges and liars.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry is right in step with many conservative advocacy groups and commentators when he derides global warming as "all one contrived phony mess that is falling apart under its own weight." The conservative magazine National Review regularly heaps scorn on climate-change worries.

Whole column here: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-oped-0901-chapman-20110901,0,1332482.column

Thanks uberlibertarian for this great find.

Here a clear denounciation of Republican denialist ideology:

Siding with the 3 percent of scientists who question climate change may play well with a small minority of hard-right voters, but it doesn't serve the rest of us. There has always been a place in American society for the fringe dwellers -- the religious zealots and the conspiracy theorists and the committed Luddites. But that place is not in the White House.

Living in denial in the face of evidence isn't a sign of leadership -- it is a sign of delusion and it should disqualify you for serving as president.

There is also a healthy tradition of skepticism in America, but skepticism is not an excuse for inaction. It should be the beginning of a quest to find answers. If Representative Michele Bachman doubts the existence of climate change, she should travel to the Arctic in the company of researchers. If Governor Perry doubts that the globe is warming, he should walk the scarred plains of Texas with those who have studied the links between climate change, more frequent droughts, and intensified wildfires.

The fact that they don't journey to find the answers tells me they aren't skeptics at all: they are just closed-minded. They don't want to pursue new information or collect the facts on the ground. They want to stay within the confines of Tea Party ideology.

Casting doubt in and of itself shouldn't disqualify you from becoming the president of the United States. But willfully rejecting the facts, when the consequences of doing so will be devastating, should.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/heather-taylormiesle/climate-change-gop_b_964740.html

[Midway ®]

I get your drift Bucket, as there is some truth in it.   Actually, I don’t know about you but I’ve always been uncomfortable with the question:  “What is the meaning of life”.  To me it’s one of those nonsense questions, wherein there are valid words, but their assembly forms nonsense.   

Perhaps the word “purpose” would make more sense, but then I would also have difficulty in answering that question too.  “What is the purpose of life?”  Life in general, in ........

The purpose of life is to reproduce...

Any other questions, Antisthenes?

[Dog Walker]

A chicken is an egg's way of producing more eggs.

[Ernest Street]

Ignorance of Science and lack of Education on simple facts is not new.
It's been replaced with social networking, drama,cinema,publicity stunts and highly stylized personal grooming shown to us every day by the "House wives from Hell".
Science= 0........Hottie=power and attention.
I'm an Amateur Astronomer who does Public outreach at schools and other events.
The ignorant comments send us reeling at times.   (picture some smartphoneass holding his smartphone up to a known planet and challenging us with :" Are you sure? this App says it isn't!")    

[Midway ®]

Ignorance of science and lack of education is the Republican party's method of choice for the maintenance of a permanent political majority.

That's why their top priorities are defunding education and opposing abortion / birth control, so that they can have legions of slack jawed hillbilly nitwits that will vote for them no matter how they are abused.

This will offset the union workers and ethnic minorities who (unfortunately) had the opportunity of becoming better educated as a result of previous government "largesse" and started voting in their own self best interest.

Ladies and Gentlemen and children of all ages;
I submit for your viewing pleasure the following video, so that you may be introduced to your next President of the United States of America:

http://www.youtube.com/v/e77xjH6VO7E&hl