Anti-Science Republicans

uscitizen too said:
Yes.

eu·gen·ics/yuˈdʒɛn ɪks/ Show Spelled [yoo-jen-iks] Show IPA
noun, ( used with a singular verb )
the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)

[URL]http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=eugenics+definition&ei=UTF-8&fr=w3i&type=W3i_DS,136,0_0,Search,20120416,6901,0,8,0[[/URL]

Which can be done either by environment or human intervention.
Click to expand...

As your definition makes clear, eugenics is accomplished by human intervention or rather it is human evolution directed according to some master plan.
 
Dixie said:
Well, if you have information to refute that roughly 5% of the world population profess to be Nihilists, please enlighten me! What it means is simple, Nihilists believe in nothing. When we subtract these people from the whole, we come up with 95% who are not Nihilists, who do believe in something. There is no lying or reason to lie, this is just a statistic.

I have repeatedly pointed out, I live in the middle of the Bible Belt, and have lived here my whole life. In 54 years of being around devoutly religious believers, I have NEVER come across a single person who believes the Earth is 9,000 years old. I'm not saying they don't exist, but they are certainly a rarity, and not indicative of the typical religious believer. It is you who is being dishonest, and trying to make the argument that ALL believers in religion, subscribe to this line of thought, and that is simply not true.

The scientist who mapped the human genome, is a devout Christian believer in God. How can this be? How can he believe in God and ALSO believe in Science? Maybe it's because his religious faith doesn't rest in Science? Maybe it's because he understands science to be a never-ending quest for answers, not a faith to believe in?

Whenever you, or any other idiot, mutters the accusation "denies science" I can't help but laugh. In actuality, SCIENCE denies Science! The very nature and reasoning behind the Scientific Method, is to deny conclusion and presumption of finding. It is how Science perpetuates, and continues to be Science. Whenever you have drawn a conclusion from Science, and believe that Science has provided a definitive answer, you have stopped practicing Science and began practicing FAITH!
Click to expand...

You are the one making the assertion that 5% of the population are nihilists. You need the source. It is not a useful as a statistic without a source and it is no better than something you just made up. You are lying about what it means. Just because you are not a nihilist does not mean you believe in the supernatual.

Funny how you guys elect these oddballs all the time and put them in leadership roles.

The Republican quotes are anti science. They are not arguing against a conclusion based on scientific evidence. They are rejecting the conclusions based on their faith. By arguing against anthropogenic global warming based only on the idea that God controls it, the speaker is denying man's ability to answer such questions and leaving it all to faith.

This thread is not Anti-Science Christians. It is Anti-Science Republicans. This guy involved in mapping the human genome is not on the science committee and the fact that he is a Christian does not mean he is a Republican. He is absolutely irrelevant.

Your response is nothing but the same old propaganda that you repeat over and over and over again.
 
Dawkins-Religion.jpg


wilder-relig-govt.jpg


large-high-wall-intel.jpg


math-as-science.jpg


Busted-Science.jpg
 
Well, it's not surprisng. Congress is full of people who try and legislate things they're not experts in. It's not just science, it's everything. Ironically the one thing Congress could possibly be considered and expert in, getting elected, they refuse to legislate on. It's all your own faults for asking for it in the first place.
 
SuperstringTheory said:
You are the one making the assertion that 5% of the population are nihilists. You need the source. It is not a useful as a statistic without a source and it is no better than something you just made up. You are lying about what it means. Just because you are not a nihilist does not mean you believe in the supernatual.
Click to expand...

I didn't say if you're not a Nihilist, you believe in the supernatural. I said you believe in something, otherwise, you'd be a Nihilist who believes in nothing. The statistics are out there, you just need to go look. I don't need to cite sources for common knowledge facts we can find with relative ease, just by consulting Google.

Funny how you guys elect these oddballs all the time and put them in leadership roles.

The Republican quotes are anti science. They are not arguing against a conclusion based on scientific evidence. They are rejecting the conclusions based on their faith. By arguing against anthropogenic global warming based only on the idea that God controls it, the speaker is denying man's ability to answer such questions and leaving it all to faith.
Click to expand...

There is no "conclusion" based on scientific evidence, unless you have abandoned science and started practicing faith. Science doesn't "conclude" things, it can't "prove" or "disprove" anything. You can't scientifically prove that God doesn't control the climate, and to claim that you have, is nothing more than a faith-based conclusion.

This thread is not Anti-Science Christians. It is Anti-Science Republicans. This guy involved in mapping the human genome is not on the science committee and the fact that he is a Christian does not mean he is a Republican. He is absolutely irrelevant.

Your response is nothing but the same old propaganda that you repeat over and over and over again.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know, and I was going to ask you if there are any Democrats who believe the Earth is 9,000 years old, just out of curiosity. You didn't bother to include them, but I am sure this anomaly is not exclusive to members of any one political party. The guy who mapped the human genome is certainly relative, he proves that you are the one who is "anti-science" and actually perverting science to forward your own personal faith and beliefs. You are entitled to believe and have faith in whatever you please, but you can't hijack science and use it to endorse your particular faith.
 
Dixie said:
I didn't say if you're not a Nihilist, you believe in the supernatural. I said you believe in something, otherwise, you'd be a Nihilist who believes in nothing. The statistics are out there, you just need to go look. I don't need to cite sources for common knowledge facts we can find with relative ease, just by consulting Google.

There is no "conclusion" based on scientific evidence, unless you have abandoned science and started practicing faith. Science doesn't "conclude" things, it can't "prove" or "disprove" anything. You can't scientifically prove that God doesn't control the climate, and to claim that you have, is nothing more than a faith-based conclusion.

Yes, I know, and I was going to ask you if there are any Democrats who believe the Earth is 9,000 years old, just out of curiosity. You didn't bother to include them, but I am sure this anomaly is not exclusive to members of any one political party. The guy who mapped the human genome is certainly relative, he proves that you are the one who is "anti-science" and actually perverting science to forward your own personal faith and beliefs. You are entitled to believe and have faith in whatever you please, but you can't hijack science and use it to endorse your particular faith.
Click to expand...

Belief is not the same as faith. No amount of your idiotic ramblings, word parsing, context dropping and vulgar sophistry will change that. Faith is a type of belief, specifically belief in a proposition without proof.

Your claim that 5% of the population are nihilists requires faith since you have offered no proof. It is not common knowledge. That there is some sort of common understanding of the demographics of nihilism is ridculous. Frankly, I doubt the common person even knows what nihilism means. You don't.

I just put it in to google and there are no relevant hits.

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&tbo=d&...87,d.eWU&fp=6c5a4d850e0b0143&biw=1519&bih=766

Mapping of the human genome was not completed by one scientist alone. Many people participated. Whoever this guy is (you don't even bother to name him as this reference has just become a part of your tired and redundant propaganda) his faith has no relevance to this as the point was not about theists opposed to science, but Republicans. Last week Phelps was not a social conservative because he once supported Democrats, now this unnamed scientist is a Republican because he believes in God.

Get some new troll material.
 
uscitizen too said:
I see nothing in that definition that limits the discouraging or encouraging to be done by humans?
Click to expand...

It's right there in the opening. The environment does not study or believe in things. Eugenics is human evolution guided by intelligence. Basically, animal husbandry for humans.
 
SuperstringTheory said:
Belief is not the same as faith. No amount of your idiotic ramblings, word parsing, context dropping and vulgar sophistry will change that. Faith is a type of belief, specifically belief in a proposition without proof.
Click to expand...

Contradict yourself much? Yes, "faith" is a belief in a proposition without proof, like the proposition that God doesn't control the climate or didn't originally create life. You can't disprove God with science, therefore, it requires FAITH for you to disbelieve God based on science.

Your claim that 5% of the population are nihilists requires faith since you have offered no proof. It is not common knowledge. That there is some sort of common understanding of the demographics of nihilism is ridculous. Frankly, I doubt the common person even knows what nihilism means. You don't.

I just put it in to google and there are no relevant hits.

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&tbo=d&...87,d.eWU&fp=6c5a4d850e0b0143&biw=1519&bih=766
Click to expand...

I don't know what to tell you, I guess you didn't try the proper search terms. Did you find any indication of how various beliefs break down? I know someone has done these, where they find how many people are Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. Some people believe in Naturalism or Nature, some people even believe in multiple Gods, but every survey or study I've seen, has the Nihilists at about 5%. If you have something that contradicts that number, or if you'd like to suggest an alternate number, I am all for that. But to just continue to stubbornly deny something so basic, is almost laughable, if it weren't so pathetic. And the only thing MORE pathetic, is to see that Rune and Rana "thanked" your belligerent non-point.

Mapping of the human genome was not completed by one scientist alone. Many people participated. Whoever this guy is (you don't even bother to name him as this reference has just become a part of your tired and redundant propaganda) his faith has no relevance to this as the point was not about theists opposed to science, but Republicans. Last week Phelps was not a social conservative because he once supported Democrats, now this unnamed scientist is a Republican because he believes in God.

Get some new troll material.
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Collins_(geneticist)

Francis Collins, learn his name, he will be forever noted in history as the Christian man who mapped the human genome. I don't know if he is one of them wacky Republican Christians who believe the earth is 9,000 years old, because he was appointed Director of the NIH by Obama, but he is definitely a Christian believer in God.
 
Dixie said:
Whenever you have drawn definitive conclusion on anything, you have stopped practicing science and begun practicing faith. You are no longer asking questions, and instead, are exercising faith and belief in an idea you've concluded. Science does not conclude. Science continues to ponder the possibilities, to ask further questions, and never assumes to prove or disprove.

5% of the people on this planet, are Nihilists, which means 95% of us believe (have faith) in something greater than self. Some of these people have adopted Science as their religious faith, in place of more traditional and conventional organized religion. Some people have decided to use their faith in Science as a weapon to do battle against those who have religious faith. But faith, is still faith, and it's not Science.

When Science ponders the questions of things like climate or the origination of life, it posits theories and explores the various possibilities, but it never draws definitive conclusions, in fact, many of the speculations science has made through the ages, have proven to be incorrect or inaccurate, and theories have failed or been replaced with alternate versions. Science is a never-ending process of asking questions, and as soon as you've stopped asking questions and determined something to be conclusive, you have effectively stopped practicing scientific endeavor, and have adopted a faith. No different, really, than a Jehovah's Witness.
Click to expand...

That's about it, Dixie. BUT part of the problem lies in the language we use. Words like 'faith', 'belief', even 'evidence' may be interpreted subjectively. I would not agree that science has become/is becoming a religion, but I would certainly support the theory that atheism is becoming and, indeed, has become in parts of America, a godless religion.
Now you will say, I am sure, that this is because people have a need for spiritualism and that is where I disagree. SOME people have that need and there appears to be a need in America, perhaps because of the nations youth, for a 'church' gathering society. (Yes it is happening elsewhere too, but there is a similarity between America and the Orient in the desire to form 'purpose based' support groups.
Atheism is not a 'disbelief' for that presupposes a 'rational' belief. Atheism is simply the norm. The status quo. The natural way of life without the imposition of any man made dogma.
Many people need a faith - unfortunately. But the prosletisation of such faith and the insistence that babies be brought up in that faith is against the natural condition of man and should be discouraged.
 
Dixie said:
Whenever you have drawn definitive conclusion on anything, you have stopped practicing science and begun practicing faith. You are no longer asking questions, and instead, are exercising faith and belief in an idea you've concluded. Science does not conclude. Science continues to ponder the possibilities, to ask further questions, and never assumes to prove or disprove.

5% of the people on this planet, are Nihilists, which means 95% of us believe (have faith) in something greater than self. Some of these people have adopted Science as their religious faith, in place of more traditional and conventional organized religion. Some people have decided to use their faith in Science as a weapon to do battle against those who have religious faith. But faith, is still faith, and it's not Science.

When Science ponders the questions of things like climate or the origination of life, it posits theories and explores the various possibilities, but it never draws definitive conclusions, in fact, many of the speculations science has made through the ages, have proven to be incorrect or inaccurate, and theories have failed or been replaced with alternate versions. Science is a never-ending process of asking questions, and as soon as you've stopped asking questions and determined something to be conclusive, you have effectively stopped practicing scientific endeavor, and have adopted a faith. No different, really, than a Jehovah's Witness.
Click to expand...
Well as the congressman from GA stated "You're only half right". Science is most definatly "conclusive". It draws conclusions all the time. With out that aspect of science, it would be pretty worthless as a tool. What science doesn't do is draw "absolute conslusion". If what you meant to say is that all scientific knowledge is tentative in nature, than you would be correct but science has always been about making observations about nature, testing those observations, drawing conclusions from those tests, then publication of those tests made and conclusions drawn so that they may be independently verified by others. The fact that a scientific theory is always tentative and, in principle, falsifiable, doesn't mean that it does not have a very high probability of being correct.
 
uscitizen too said:
Yes.

eu·gen·ics/yuˈdʒɛn ɪks/ Show Spelled [yoo-jen-iks] Show IPA
noun, ( used with a singular verb )
the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics)

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=eugenics+definition&ei=UTF-8&fr=w3i&type=W3i_DS,136,0_0,Search,20120416,6901,0,8,0["]http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=eugenics+definition&ei=UTF-8&fr=w3i&type=W3i_DS,136,0_0,Search,20120416,6901,0,8,0[[/URL]

Which can be done either by environment or human intervention.
Click to expand...
Fine but what does that have to do with evolutionary theory?
 
Sinn Fein said:
Well, it's not surprisng. Congress is full of people who try and legislate things they're not experts in. It's not just science, it's everything. Ironically the one thing Congress could possibly be considered and expert in, getting elected, they refuse to legislate on. It's all your own faults for asking for it in the first place.
Click to expand...
Uh you must not have read the article. The Chair of the science committee is an OB-GYN.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top