What’s that?

That nearly unfathomably powerful object we revolve around is the cause of heating, overheating and underheating the earth? What do you mean it changes in scales we don’t even have ways to calculate?

I can’t believe that idiocy, it MUST be the emissions from my dryer or something else that makes my life enjoyable.

It CAN’T be the sun. Whoever said that is racist.

blah.

eh, the morlocks just want to get rid of the sun

Now it’s gonna be fun watching the moonbats try to argue
against CERN, probably the most heavyweight, legitimate, impeccable scientific entity in the world.

yea, but, see if the sun causes weather, what happens when it’s cloudy or nightime????
Huh, Huh, answer me that smartypants!!

The solution is obvious. Tax the sun, and give the proceeds to the UN.

I’m sorry but I don’t get the racist comment. It seems to me that the author of this article is the one absurdly playing the race card to beef up his article, and it was so not needed.

“Dale says:
September 1, 2011 at 9:51 am

I’m sorry but I don’t get the racist comment. It seems to me that the author of this article is the one absurdly playing the race card to beef up his article, and it was so not needed.”

Do try to keep up. Al Gore recently likened global warming skepticism to something that should be as socially unacceptable as racism or Holocaust denial.

Dale, Gore’s comment was the RECENT past, and it is very germane to the discussion. When facts are presented that destroy the global-warming advocate’s idiocy, they lash out with anything that they have, the most recent example of that lashing is the race card.

Understand?

Jonah Goldberg, author of Liberal Fascism the great book no liberal is able to read since it has words with more than 3 syllables and references actual history, wonders why the left gets to set the agenda on science.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/275903/re-anti-science-smear-jonah-goldberg#

Its too bad that Goldberg misses the boat on this. He does not seem to be able acknowledge the damage conservatives have done to their credibility on science issues.

Probably for the same reason that conservatives cannot acknowledge the damage they’ve done to their credibility on science issues.

The conservative problem is not liberal elitism in science; scientific facts have a way of coming out and the left would eventually implode with the issues; e.g., AGW and racially-inherited intelligence.

The conservative problem is conservatives: in trying to substitute religion for evolutionary theory.

Conservatives have tried to implement an entire brand of pseudoscience, creationism, in a vain attempt to displace evolutionary theory.

Conservatives are the stewards of a brand of idiotic, indefensible, incoherent nonsense that they have tried to peddle as “science”.

Conservatives have taken their pseudoscience to court time and again only to lose, in a vain attempt to legislate what science is (in their opinion). Science, BTW does not offer up “choice”. This is what the left has done with AGW and conservatives are rightfully, outraged by their brand of pseudoscience.

But we should have been in a better position to fight them.

But no. Conservative politicians (witness the latest fiasco with Huntsman and Perry) have to straddle untenable positions between evolution and creationism, meanwhile trying to dispute or support AGW, or both.

But when it comes right down to it, without Creationism, conservatives are the party of science. We are the crew-cut guys with the “right stuff”. The left are dorks when it comes to science and the use it like they use everything – without ethics, to exercise contempt, make money and to feel personally superior to others.

Conservatives are the physicists, mathematicians, chemists and engineers. Liberals study sociology. Biology has both (and that’s probably bc there are so many women today in the health sciences).

But while Goldberg wonders why the left has a stranglehold on the issues of science, its a shame that he was unable to recognize that conservatives have squandered their credibility by playing to the personal beliefs, whims and religious convictions of the right in their oblivious acceptance of creationism.

At least there’s some meager compensation in knowing that the left has now done the same thing with AGW.

SHOOT CAPTIAN PLANET

Don’t worry, Al Gore can still save us all from the ongoing menace posed by Man-bear-pig.

On a more serious note, does anyone think even the most bulletproof study will slow down Algore and his watermelons? They have an agenda and they only allow actual science into it when it can be twisted to fit that agenda. This study, like all the others that disagree with their quasi-scientific religious dogma, they will conveniently ignore.

A hindrance that we conservatives will have in defeating Obama, will be pseudo-cons trying to equate that if you believe in creation, you are unelectable.

Bullshit.

No Rich,

Go back and read it again. The gist of what I said was that defending the pseudoscience of creationism is a losing proposition for conservatives.

That is different than holding a belief in creation, which a lot of biologists hold.

Try and keep up, buddy.

The entire conversation about Darwin’s THEORY of evolution is a huge waste of time, money, and resources. There is nothing to be gained by it – other than for the scientists, teachers, and others making money by pushing the theory.

The truth is that we will not know the answer to how God created everything until we go to heaven and only if God wants to tell us.

We need these scientists to be working on things like cures for diseases, such as cancer and AIDS. I have seen little or no improvement in those things in my lifetime. More and more people are being diagnosed with cancer than ever before and ALL of them are suffering. We don’t even have much to make us feel much better when we have a cold or the flu. Much of the money given to cancer charities is going to pay executives, or to Planned Parenthood, or back in the demoncrats’ pockets. I just don’t see the progress that there should be.

I think this is why God said this:

“…command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer 4 or to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. Such things promote controversial speculations rather than advancing God’s work—which is by faith. 5 The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.”

1 Timothy 1:3-5
New International Version (NIV)

“I just don’t see the progress that there should be. ”

Jodie,

You may want to supplement your reading material.

While the THEORY of evolution is a formal paradigm that underlies all biology and the natural sciences, comparatively few scientist work exclusively on evolution.

BTW do you know what a theory is?

“Much of the money given to cancer charities is going to pay executives,…”

Yes, you are right on the money here, Jodie.

Lay people have no idea just how much money goes into the personal pockets of the people working in cancer research. Cancer research is a highly politicized arena, but probably not in the way you might think.

What happens is that since there are many cancers, with many, many complex cellular mechanisms, very few people understand cancer.

Consequently, researchers are able to go from investment group to investment group, from foundation to foundation, to grant study group to present data and applications that promise the next new innovation.

Since a lot of anti-cancer drugs work in vitro and in animal models (for a variety of reasons) many drugs look extremely promising. So it is relatively easy to find money groups want to invest. (It’s a lot harder say, than finding investment dollars for autism).

Holding a pill in your hand today that would cure “cancer” has been estimated to be worth over 15 Trilllion dollars. So the stakes are enormously high and very enticing for the money groups.

The National Cancer Institute is entirely politicized. Their concerns are who has the biggest lab, who has the most diverse lab and who is contacted to whom. The networks then take turns doling out the grant money between the connected.

By the time all this happens, nothing much happens.

The biotechs working on antibodies, vaccines and other large molecular entities are the best hope. The decoding of the human genome holds great promise, but has you can see, trotting out the human genome and the latest, greatest gene can be very enticing.

Needless to say, there are scientists, execs and technicians who have carved out comfortable livings in the cancer research world without ever producing a product that is suitable for treatment.

In the meantime, half the world in desperation goes looking for the latest herb, juice or cat squeeze.

Cancer research is a worthwhile field of endeavor and not everyone in it is a charlatan.

But a lot are.