Posted on 10/12/2015 1:18:45 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
this self described, evidence driven scientist thinks that murderous lunatics are only prevented from mass murder because of a campus rule that is somehow more binding than the law against homicide.
"I am frightened because I see a correlation between those who have decided there should be guns on campuses and those who deny anthropogenic global warming is occurring, despite clear scientific evidence that it is. The correlation is that, in both cases, many people are refusing to accept the facts. The fear is real because lives are being taken.Yes, it's because of all those white, conservative, Christian, gun-toting Republicans shooting up classrooms, and uh, the sun.
Given this professor’s state of mind, I am more concerned that he might set a pressure cooker off in his classroom because he is too close minded to debate issues and instead spends all his time fixated on the fact that there is disagreement...
"It is irrational to think there is a high probability that a licensed handgun owner will attend my class, have different perspectives than what I teach, ..... "
It's not only the subject matter, but the methodry by which the matter is taught
they all have a job ... from 2yrs old PK/PS right through to college graduate
They've worked at it for many years and have embedded themselves in the one structure/system that could bring Christianity and personal liberty and freedom to a Satanic world
They are children af darkness and love not the light
And now he knows what it's been like to deal with all the feminists, critical race theorists, gender studies obsessives, Trotskyites, Maoists, and flat-out Stalinists, and all the other members of the leftist lunatic coalition that have come to infest college faculties in the past thirty years.
Sauce for the gander, jerk.
He teaches “earth science” which is an econut political programming course packaged to make unmotivated students feel as if they are actually taking a science course. It is much easier to teach “soft” science students what to think than it is to try to motivate students to learn how to think, with practical hard sciences which give students the tools to evaluate the validity of information rather than to just accept it.
“By 2:30 a.m., I have found a Washington Post article providing many of the particulars of what Senator Cruz omitted: direct NASA meteorological and sea surface temperature data that clearly show global warming over the same period that Cruz dismissed using (unsourced) “satellite data.”
At 3 a.m., I am integrating this new information into my lecture later that morning, but I am even more worried because I feel passionate (and that is risky).”
This guy is all in a twist about “having the facts”, and “citing sources”, yet he trusts that a major newspaper article to get it right? That might be fine for you & me but a college-level teacher? Whatever happened to peer-reviewed publications?
He has a PhD in anthropology. He is not a scientist.
I have found a Washington Post article providing many of the particulars of what Senator Cruz omitted: direct NASA meteorological and sea surface temperature data that clearly show global warming over the same period that Cruz dismissed using (unsourced) “satellite data.”
I wonder if it just might be some shred of conscience, creeping into what’s left of his feeble mind, in knowingly, willingly having to lie to his class.
In case anyone wants to see the satellite data (obviously the author of this article is a Luddite/liar who doesn’t care how easy it is to find)
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/rss
What a passionate propagandist in the classroom. Not teaching students how to understand the data sets and the methodologies behind them, but stuffing their minds with his pre-digested conclusions.
Prof. Wolverton is the poster boy of “shut up and listen” classroom intimidation. No wonder he feels sick imaging someone might dissent and all he has on his side are “consensus” articles of cherry picked facts.
I pity the poor students who have to pay to sit through a lecture/sermon from this guy. I was half expecting him to blame the latest shooting on “climate change”.
Teach his perspective?
“Climate deniers do not have to rest their case; there is no summation of their argument. Should their arguments be exposed as invalid, they are free to change course and attack from another angle. It’s relentless.”
Well, that’s what science is all about: attempting to disprove assertions. That is the very basis of the experimental method. Nothing can ever be considered proven, merely not yet disproven, no matter what “consensus” might be invented.
And this fool calls himself a scientist, without understanding something so central to science.
The 97% comes from the definitions used for “science” and “scientist.” Those definitions are not the ones in Webster’s International Dictionaries but are more restrictive and at the same time more expansive and based on an ideological component. I don’t know where the other 3% might come from.
In the 70s, CO2 was blamed for "The Coming Ice Age", that didn't happen and then came "Global Warming".
Also note the 'Why we can't beat the Soviets' at the top of the 1977 cover page.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.