Dear America: Do you plan to get it together any time soon?

[Neil D]

Originally Posted By: Neil D

Hey, Laz....

Ever notice that when TRMS is put up in a link that has some very good commentary on one of the conservatives subjects....they seem to become quiet.....Oooooooooooooooooooo!

We have already discussed this on this thread. You think Maddow's caviling somehow makes the discussion different?

We also discussed judgmentalism on another thread.

Where is MY judgmentalism??? All I said was that this thread became quiet...And that seemed to have challenged you all... and you came, howling like a pack of wounded animals...

As for "Maddow's caviling", she make more points in her show over this subject than you ever did in any of your discussions.

And since you are so judgmental in your posts, and jumping to conclusions, this time why not contribute something worthwhile to support your side of the debate...you started this little escapade, why don't you man up and REALLY debate the issue..with some facts!

[karl]

There hasn't yet been a vote on the amended bill, so I guess we'll see. I concede that the word 'mandated' may be too strong, and 'encouraged' would have been a better choice. That's kind of off topic though.

The point is simply that I was lamenting the scientific ignorance on display. I was *not* making any argument pro or con about climate change. You grabbed the wrong end of the stick from the start and just kept on running with it.

[jasd]

QR frame:

Several things: first, the brief should lie nowhere except with the pusullus

Re: Dear America: Do you plan to get it together any time soon?

I find the above to indicate, similarly, a contribution by, seemingly, the sorts of 'progressive liberals' who have insinuated themselves into our traditional form of Gov't. Sad.

America has made, makes, and will continue making mistakes. It is a natural continuum... However,

the bolded above is such a tell – as to reflect rather badly, imho, upon its composer.

Second, astrology is correct – when meaning astronomy – should one prefer the conceit of an obsolete. In similar fashion I prefer to spell supercede in its alternate form (OED).

Thirdly, Gorebal Warming is just that – Gorebal – when conflated with ‘man-made’. Global warming goes hand-in-hand with the ‘warming’ evidenced throughout our entire solar system. The generally frozen ‘oceans’ of Mars are melting; witness the images taken by our satellites showing icebergs floating in ‘newly melted oceans’. The only contribution man has made to Mars-warming has been entirely ‘Green’ – specifically, the green rover, which emits no CO2.

Even the giant Jupiter shows signs of massive disturbances.

(For a number of decades the earth’s magnetic density field has been weakening; we don’t know why. A weakened or lessened magnetic field contributes to a more fluid magma underlying earth’s tectonic plates. By that fact itself, we may infer friction with friction implying heat, as in warming.)

Not to fear, y’all – we’ll soon have such climatic changes, as to cause mass starvations followed by mass deaths – from Gov’ts and from debilitated immune systems, as well – chemical and genetically-modified bio weapons.

Enjoy today, for assuredly, tomorrow’s goin’ tah be a bummer!

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Substituting the word "astrology" for "astronomy" still strikes me as being funny. But, then, I have a warped sense of humor...comes from working nights for too many years in the ER.

[LifeHiscost]

Originally Posted By: olger

But science, with it's methodological reliance on induction, can never produce truth.

0g

Can never produce truth? Really? Never? Perhaps you would like to revise that.

It was my understanding that science was designed to find truth, not produce it. It is to their shame they(the scientists) have chosen to eliminate truth as reality unless it could be smelled, tasted, felt, seen, heard, or tasted.

[LifeHiscost]

Originally Posted By: Bravus

There hasn't yet been a vote on the amended bill, so I guess we'll see. I concede that the word 'mandated' may be too strong, and 'encouraged' would have been a better choice. That's kind of off topic though.

The point is simply that I was lamenting the scientific ignorance on display. I was *not* making any argument pro or con about climate change. You grabbed the wrong end of the stick from the start and just kept on running with it.

Are you, or are you not, an educator, Bravus?

Do you do this to your students? Just throw something up on the board with your only comment being the broad stroke condemnation, "Dear America: Do you plan to get it together any time soon?" and then come down on your students when they start discussing the conclusion of the author in the article that YOU posted?

Here is the concluding paragraph:

Quote:

Yesterday, the South Dakota Senate passed by a vote of 18-17 an amended version of the resolution which eliminates most of the anti-science conspiracy theories, but still asserts that the “global warming debate” has “prejudiced the scientific investigation of global climatic change phenomena.” The amended version now “returns to the House for approval.” (HT: Thoughts From Kansas

Note that the objection in the concluding paragraph of the author is not what the legislators took out, but what they left in - about the global warming debate. And I, and all those scientists I posted early in this thread, agree with what the legislators left in the Bill.

So, please acknowledge that I was addressing the conclusion of the author in the article at the link YOU provided to start the thread and, subsequently, the open derision on TRMS link provided by Neil. In my opinion, if you weren't trying to ridicule those who are opposed to the unproven theory that man's miniscule contribution to greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is causing warming of the planet, you did an extremely poor job of distancing yourself from those who were.

And, incidentally, the substitution of the word "astrology" for "astronomy" is a linguistic error which does not mandate your conclusion that it is accompanied by "scientific ignorance."

[Bravus]

Satellite photos of icebergs floating in newly melted oceans on Mars? Linkage please! Far as I know there's still a fair bit of uncertainty that there's water on Mars at all, let alone oceans of the stuff...

[Bravus]

And karl, I am an educator in relation to my students, but do not stand in that role in relation to you. We are equal interlocutors having a discussion, that's all. I started the discussion by lamenting the state of science education in the US, a country that since the push just after Sputnik has led the world in science and technology. As stimulus for that discussion I juxtaposed a thread title and a link to an article with no further comment. Perhaps I should have been more explicit, but I do like to assume people will read and choose. And yeah, I guess it was quite legitimate of you to take the debate off in another direction: but attacking me for views I never held or expounded wasn't something I was going to just sit still for.

[Bravus]

The thread title was also not intended as an insult to or attack on America. Although I'm an old leftie librul I am *not* reflexively anti-American. America is the world's sole current superpower, and it's going into a decline and fall, at least in part because of this lack of attention to science. How many science PhDs graduated in America last year? And how many in China?

I want America to get it together some time real soon!

[karl]

The thread title was also not intended as an insult to or attack on America. Although I'm an old leftie librul I am *not* reflexively anti-American. America is the world's sole current superpower, and it's going into a decline and fall, at least in part because of this lack of attention to science. How many science PhDs graduated in America last year? And how many in China?

I want America to get it together some time real soon!

I would like to see our educators go back to the basics. No doubt many of South Dakota's legislators went to school, and looking at the bill they proposed it is obvious some of them did not receive a very good education in English.

The most important skill learned in school is READING.

It is an absolute travesty that so few students graduating from our schools read well. If one can read with comprehension, one can learn just about anything else he needs to know by reading.

[Bravus]

Amen! The schools need to focus on it - and Australian schools across the country are moving back to teaching phonics and grammar, which the evidence shows helps with that. But IMO also parents need to be reading to their kids, having their kids read to them, and reading for pleasure themselves so their kids see reading as the normal thing to do. Learning to read in school is one thing, but actually reading regularly is something else - and vitally important.

[jasd]

>>Satellite photos of icebergs floating in newly melted oceans on Mars?<<

Geezerville, memory circuits cascade: read lakes rather than oceans...

>>Linkage please!<<

M11-03072, and M10-00798

>>Far as I know there's still a fair bit of uncertainty that there's water on Mars at all, let alone oceans of the stuff...<<

Indeed, there is that uncertainty; however... Personally, I hold to a hypothesis that much, if not the most part, of Mars’ former oceans are now part of ours.

[Jeannieb43]

Amen! The schools need to focus on it - and Australian schools across the country are moving back to teaching phonics and grammar, which the evidence shows helps with that. But IMO also parents need to be reading to their kids, having their kids read to them, and reading for pleasure themselves so their kids see reading as the normal thing to do. Learning to read in school is one thing, but actually reading regularly is something else - and vitally important.

Hear, hear! Reading is becoming a lost art. Too much getting our news from TV these days, without learning phonics or spelling by actually seeing good words in PRINT.

But my response to this very interesting thread is:

(1) astrology and astronomy are two very different words, meaning two very different disciplines. If they're used incorrectly I think it's the fault of the author(s) -- maybe even the state legislators in South Dakota.

(2) and "supercede" is an improper spelling - even if OED does show it as an alternate spelling. Because the word has no relationship to "cede-ing" [giving over] anything, thus cede is not a part of the word. The word is "supersede:" to lead, or to take the place of something which is now out of date.

Sorry to get this thread off topic; but sometimes the "word freak" inside me just takes over.

[teresaq]

Amen! The schools need to focus on it - and Australian schools across the country are moving back to teaching phonics and grammar, which the evidence shows helps with that. But IMO also parents need to be reading to their kids, having their kids read to them, and reading for pleasure themselves so their kids see reading as the normal thing to do. Learning to read in school is one thing, but actually reading regularly is something else - and vitally important.

do you think that will help them know the difference between astrology and astronomy? lol.

[jasd]

>>(1) astrology and astronomy are two very different words, meaning two very different disciplines. If they're used incorrectly I think it's the fault of the author(s) -- maybe even the state legislators in South Dakota.

(2) and "supercede" is an improper spelling - even if OED does show it as an alternate spelling. Because the word has no relationship to "cede-ing" [giving over] anything, thus cede is not a part of the word. The word is "supersede:" to lead, or to take the place of something which is now out of date.<<

Hmm, kinda goes to vernacular, yes? Anyway, here’s how the Online Etymology Dictionary treats the subject:

astrology:

late 14c., from L. astrologia "astronomy," from Gk. astrologia "telling of the stars," from astron "star" (see astro) + -logia "treating of," comb. form of logon "one who speaks (in a certain manner)." Originally identical with astronomy, it had also a special sense of "practical astronomy, astronomy applied to prediction of events." This was divided into natural astrology "the calculation and foretelling of natural phenomenon" (tides, eclipses, etc.), and judicial astrology "the art of judging occult influences of stars on human affairs" (also known as stromancy, 1650s). Differentiation between astrology and astronomy began late 1400s and by 17c. this word was limited to "reading influences of the stars and their effects on human destiny." Astrological is recorded from 1590s. [bolded is mine]

As I said, “...conceit of an obsolete.”

Hard to second-guess the authority of the OED – notwithstanding... Were it otherwise, the OED could easily state that supercede is an improper spelling of supersede – rather than legitimizing it as an alternate spelling.

Conceit has its perks and we do cling to our druthers, do we not?

[jasd]

>>Conceit has its perks...<<

Hmmm..., "perks"?—or ‘perqs’? :(

[Bravus]

Yep, them too. How many layers of meaning can we fit in 4 words? (One thing I deeply appreciate about your posts is how you make a few words do a lot of work (I leave the inversion as an exercise for the reader))

[jasd]

The 'lurker' is ever gentle on my mind...