• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Science vs. Science™!

Redress said:
I did not say it was different much. A little more noxious, but still the same. I criticize political opinion articles in bipartisan fashion. On the topic of science, when some one uses Bill Nye to criticize science, you know they are either totally ****ing retarded(and Ben Shapiro isn't), or they are being totally ****ing disingenuous(and Shapiro does that alot).
Click to expand...

Bill Nye was the leader of the #MarchforScience event the other day. The entire article was written because of the #MarchforScience, so why wouldn't he mention Bill Nye?
 
Josie said:
What part did you disagree with that most and why?
Click to expand...

Where the article refers to science as the "religion of the left". Science is not anyone's religion. Science is science. Most of it was just a liberal bash-fest, which is fine, satire is fun.
 
lurchadams said:
Where the article refers to science as the "religion of the left". Science is not anyone's religion. Science is science. Most of it was just a liberal bash-fest, which is fine, satire is fun.
Click to expand...

Clearly science isn't science to some. If anyone dares to say that a male dressed up as a female is still a man, what kind of reaction does that get from most people on the left?
 
Josie said:
Bill Nye was the leader of the #MarchforScience event the other day. The entire article was written because of the #MarchforScience, so why wouldn't he mention Bill Nye?
Click to expand...

There is a difference between mentioning him, and using him to somehow refute how "the left" uses science. For example, he holds up an episode of Bill Nye Saves the World as part of his effort, but it really is not a science show, it is a show that looks at topics in science, which is actually a significant difference. I know a fair amount about some science topics, and I can talk about them and discuss them, but that is not science, I am not a scientist. It is not science, it is about science. Bill Nye does things about science, he does not "do" science.
 
Josie said:
Take a gander and tell me what you think.

Science & Politics -- Left?s Religion | National Review
Click to expand...

Here is simple Hint to help shovel through the B.S

When an article starts with the rants like..Saturday, leftists around the nation took to the streets to sound off about their new religion: Science™! ...it is a pretty good bet things will disintegrate to compost of utter non-sense, half truth, alternative facts and total lack of logic or coherent thought.

So let's move on to other topics....

Diving Mullah
 
Josie said:
So? Why do you need my comment in order to have an opinion?
Click to expand...
I said it's usual an customary.

I don't know why you would want to avoid having posters comment on your opinion. You found the article interesting enough to post, surely you have some thoughts on it and wouldn't mind us knowing them.

As for my opinion, post #12 pretty much covers it. Science is not a religion, as you well know as a teacher.

I agree too that rants don't make for good political discussion and neither does going Godwin on the topic, as the writer did at the end.

Now you.

P.S. I was detained and could not respond more quickly.
 
Redress said:
There is a difference between mentioning him, and using him to somehow refute how "the left" uses science. For example, he holds up an episode of Bill Nye Saves the World as part of his effort, but it really is not a science show, it is a show that looks at topics in science, which is actually a significant difference. I know a fair amount about some science topics, and I can talk about them and discuss them, but that is not science, I am not a scientist. It is not science, it is about science. Bill Nye does things about science, he does not "do" science.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. Then he shouldn't have been the face of the left on the #MarchforScience, right?
 
Gina said:
I said it's usual an customary.

I don't know why you would want to avoid having posters comment on your opinion. You found the article interesting enough to post, surely you have some thoughts on it and wouldn't mind us knowing them.
Click to expand...

And I don't know why this is such a big deal to you.

Gina said:
As for my opinion, post #12 pretty much covers it. Science is not a religion, as you well know as a teacher.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was, nor did the article say it was. He was saying that people say they believe in science, but really they just believe in what they want to believe regardless of scientific facts.
 
Josie said:
I agree with you. Then he shouldn't have been the face of the left on the #MarchforScience, right?
Click to expand...

Total non sequitor.
 
Josie said:
I know that's the usual -- I'm unusual. :)

I don't want people to comment on MY opinion of the article -- I would like to hear straight-from-reading-the-article-and-nothing-else opinions. :)
Click to expand...

Personally, I don't do assigned reading. It's your thread, if you can't be bothered...
 
Josie said:
Clearly science isn't science to some. If anyone dares to say that a male dressed up as a female is still a man, what kind of reaction does that get from most people on the left?
Click to expand...

Wow, I'm not sure where you're going with that. When I think of science, I think of things that can be objectively proven, such as:

-The Earth is round.
-Gravity exists.
-Evolution is "a thing".
-Human activity has an effect on global warming.

You know - stuff that some people on the right deny.
 
Redress said:
She is fishing for a response I think.
Click to expand...

I just like throwing things out there and hearing people's opinions. I'm a teacher -- it's my nature. Nothing nefarious going on here.
 
Josie said:
I didn't say it was, nor did the article say it was. He was saying that people say they believe in science, but really they just believe in what they want to believe regardless of scientific facts.
Click to expand...

No, he was saying liberals use science to justify things he disagrees with. Science, when the author agrees with the conclusion is science. When he disagrees he calls it Sciencetm.
 
spud_meister said:
No, he was saying liberals use science to justify things he disagrees with. Science, when the author agrees with the conclusion is science. When he disagrees he calls it Sciencetm.
Click to expand...

No, that's not what he was saying, spuddy. He's saying that some liberals believe things that aren't backed up by science, but they still claim that it's science. Hence, the cheeky "TM" notation.
 
Josie said:
And I don't know why this is such a big deal to you.


I didn't say it was, nor did the article say it was. He was saying that people say they believe in science, but really they just believe in what they want to believe regardless of scientific facts.
Click to expand...

Indeed, you scrupulously didn't say anything about the article, but the author did say this:

This is the dirty little secret of the Left’s sudden embrace of Science™ — it’s not science they support, but religion. They support that which they believe but cannot prove and do not care about proving.[/b]
Click to expand...

So you're equating science with religious faith? There are no facts behind scientific principles?
 
Gina said:
Indeed, you scrupulously didn't say anything about the article, but the author did say this:

So you're equating science with religious faith? There are no facts behind scientific principles?
Click to expand...

You seem to be missing the point of the article. I'll repeat it again:

He was saying that people say they believe in science, but really they just believe in what they want to believe regardless of scientific facts.
Click to expand...

He's not equating science to religion -- he's making a very clear distinction between the two. He used the example of a transgender person. The scientific facts are that a man dressed as a woman is still a man and always will be a man. What is the response from people on the left when someone says that? They vehemently disagree with scientific facts. They believe he's a woman - so he's a woman. That's not science.
 
Parrish said:
Are you afraid to debate/embarrassed /defend your opinion?
Click to expand...

Would you like to comment on the article or my responses thus far? This thread isn't about me, Parrish.
 
lurchadams said:
I think the National Review has an extreme right-wing bias. I also think it's ignorant to deny science.
Click to expand...

What's so "extreme right-wing" about National Review? They're conservatives. What makes them "extreme"?
 
jaeger19 said:
You aren't just whistling Dixie on that one...:shock:

Years ago.. my wife and I were being strongly recruited to send our sons to a private school. Once they broke out the intelligent design schtick.. I was outta there. They wanted to know why I wasn't interested. Well.. never ask me for my opinion of you don't want it.

I pointed out that ID was an anathema to science.
Click to expand...

Your anecdote lends credence to the saying that "public schools are for educating all children and private schools are for indoctrinating them."
 
Harshaw said:
What's so "extreme right-wing" about National Review? They're conservatives. What makes them "extreme"?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry my if my opinion offends you. It's how I feel. Look at the article in the OP. All it does is ridicule liberals. If all the article did was ridicule conservatives I'd say that it had an extreme left wing bias.
 
Josie said:
Would you like to comment on the article or my responses thus far? This thread isn't about me, Parrish.
Click to expand...

1. It's BS and more of your BS.


2. Really?;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom