|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Posted on 11/17/2014 7:46:11 AM PST by SoConPubbie
“Intellectual achievement used to be revered in this country, not detested,” wrote Michael Specter, who specializes in scientific and medical topics for the New Yorker, in a Friday online piece. Ah, but that was before conservative Republicans such as Jim Inhofe and the “appalling” Ted Cruz rose to prominence.
Specter mused that Pope Francis, who “believes that science, rational thought, and data all play powerful and positive roles in human life,” would be preferable to Inhofe or Cruz, who “seem as if they do not” believe those things, as chair of a Senate committee that deals with scientific and environmental matters.
From Specter’s piece (emphasis added):
It’s a shame that there is no provision in the Constitution of the United States that would permit Pope Francis to serve as the chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Or, for that matter, that there’s no way for him to lead the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Instead, it looks like we are going to have Republicans James Inhofe, of Oklahoma, and Ted Cruz, of Texas, in those jobs.
That’s too bad, because the Pope believes that science, rational thought, and data all play powerful and positive roles in human life. The senators seem as if they do not. Last month, Francis…said, essentially, that the Catholic Church had no problem with evolution or with the Big Bang theory of the origins of the universe…
This [was not] a radical departure for the Church…[which] has, for decades, taken the position that faith and science need not be opposed to one another…
…[But the] men and women we have chosen to represent us in Washington often equate support for Darwinism with eternal damnation. After all…forty-two per cent of American adults believe that “God created humans pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so.” Among some groups—Republicans, for example—the figure is much higher. Perhaps we should at least be thankful that Congressman Paul Broun, of Georgia, who described evolution and the Big Bang theory as “lies straight from the pit of Hell,’’ lost his Senate race.
But the denialists don’t really need him; their bench is deep. They have Inhofe, who, beginning in January, will possess the authority to interfere with nearly any scientific initiative that the Obama Administration introduces…
So a man who believes that the international scientific consensus is a “hoax” will be in charge of the committee that approves funding for scientific programs…If anything, the appalling Cruz is worse; he won’t address evolution directly, but he is an energetic climate skeptic, an opponent of NASA funding, and, of course, the man who, last year, almost single-handedly shut down the government of the United States, which…caused serious and permanent damage to American science.
Intellectual achievement used to be revered in this country, not detested. For hundreds of years, progress has been defined by a reliance on independent inquiry and the study of objective data that could be tested, analyzed, and repeated. That process is usually described as the scientific method and, more than any religion, person, or movement, it has transformed the world…
“I am happy to express my profound esteem and my warm encouragement to carry forward scientific progress,’’ the Pope said. It would be nice if we could elect political leaders capable of that kind of thought. But, in this country, that might take a miracle.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Its OK to have religion in science and politics when it serves the left’s interests.
Ted Cruz is three times as smart as the squib who wrote the New Yorker piece.
In my personal opinion Francis would make a better climatologist than he does a pope. He is a lousy pope so the bar is set pretty low.
It's even progressed to the point where some people no longer believe that Bill Nye is a scientist. Can you imagine that? See how far our scientific leadership has fallen? Cuz If you don't believe Bill Nye is a scientist, then you don't believe in science.
Were scientists killed for their pelts? Did government funded scientists quit and become short order cooks during the short funding interruption?
One thing to remember is that scientists will where themselves out for money just like most other people. Much of the scientific method and publishing of not just results but method and raw data to allow other scientists to duplicate their results is to keep that from happening. When scientists "lose" the raw data and refuse to publish their methods like Michael Mann of climate hockey stick infamy, become very suspicious.
Stupid autocorrect.
Im not a Catholic apologist by any means. But this was a slap at the Pope too. It was basically the writer saying I hate Criz and Inhoff so much over global warming that even that retard in the corner (the pope) would be preferable.
The whole article was him stamping his feet claiming that the most radical views are mainstream. I have serious doubt that 42 % of America believes humanity is around 10,000 years old. Nice straw man.
But I think the reason he chose the Pope is even deeper. Global warning is after all, nothing but a modern religion. Complete with original paradise (pristine pure earth, untouched), the sinful fall of man (everything that makes our life good is destroying the earth) Saviors that absolve you if you simply follow (AlGore and Obama) and acts of penance (cold house, public transportation, toilets that don’t flush, expensive light bulbs and windmills)
So of course he is curious what the Pope thinks. Who would be discussion microchips and wonder what the Vatican’s opinion is?
The AGW “scientists” aren’t doing anything Gruber didn’t do.
Cruz or Inhofe wouldn’t put Galileo under house arrest because they didn’t believe his heliocentric theory.
Pope Francis, Inhofe, and Cruz are in agreement that science, rational thought, and data all play powerful and positive roles in human life.
The "science" of man caused global warming is far from settled. The principal factor in climate change is the Sun; we may be on the cusp of global cooling.
The phrase "scientific consensus" is an oxymoron. There is no majority vote on what is or is not scientific theory. Theories are provable or they are not.
“That’s too bad, because the Pope believes that science, rational thought, and data all play powerful and positive roles in human life. The senators seem as if they do not.”
*******************************************************
The writer is stupid and irrational. He is foolish to compare the pope with the senators. Maybe he is suffering from that “leftwing enlarged brain and liberal superiority syndrome” accidently discovered in a recent government funded scientific study to prove rightwing conservatives are conservative and therefore rightwing. Duh...
The pope is not a scientist. He is a theologian and does not have to scientifically prove anything. He deals with faith, the good and evil (devil) of the world, and G_D’s laws for man, not scientific facts, theories, and laws of the universe, although I believe neither disprove each other. If he wants to believe in Global Warming or evolution let him prove it through the scriptures not science. For now, screw evolution and Global Warming, I don’t have time to disprove either but G_D has left some clues in the scriptures and HIS creation.
The senators should be commended for questioning the so called “data and rational thoughts” used by bogus scientists including their motives. The senators are not accepting Global Warming through the faith or trust of some of these swelled brain liberals without questioning the facts and methodology used to support the conclusions. Like Reagan said, trust but verify. When facts and methodologies are found to be bogus how can you trust the results. There is a lot of bullshit science and erroneous conclusions based on desired outcomes out there. Much of it needs to be identified and tossed.
Both the pope and senators share many of the same concerns but one deals in a word of theology and the others in a world of political bureaucracy. Sometimes they are worlds apart. In a political world sometimes governments get “shut down” when funding is denied. That’s a political fact, not rocket science.
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.