Posted on 01/30/2016 7:12:48 AM PST by bray
Romans 8:24 For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?
What if everything we know about science is wrong? What if science has been completely corrupted by agenda driven politics and what we have left is more political than scientific? What if science is simply a tool to manipulate?
Science for the past hundred years has been more wrong than right. What we have seen is the foundation of science is corrupt and built on a lie so science has repeated this model over and over to promote their agenda. Science has wasted hundreds of billions of dollars molding their version of the truth in their need to control as many people as possible.
Science has become a cult like religion for numerous fallacies throughout this country to cripple capitalism and promote socialism. Some of their more recent fallacies are lead in gas causes brain damage which was later disproved. It was universally accepted as settled science by the scientific community so a crisis was declared. This one brought us all sorts of additional regulations, regs and poorer performing gas.
We then had every so called extinction fallacy under the sun which was used to destroy farming and ranching on private and public lands. They see or fake a lowering of species numbers and then through gummit or lawsuits they declare them endangered to close that land to usage. The same goes with waterways, oceans and rivers. In the Northwest fifty years ago they declared seals endangered and now they are a nuisance and nobody can control them. It is settled science so the seals are able to destroy the salmon and sturgeon runs without any way to control them thanks to agenda driven science. Since they are cute science allows them to destroy the salmon.
This is multiplied when you come to political science. Ever since Karl Marx the evolutionists wanted to have a superior political and economic system so they believed socialism was the next evolution. They sold it as a more evolved government and economic system which is blended for the modern world. They believed they were the only ones intelligent enough to divide the resources and assets equally to care of the common man and poor. They believed in this manmade utopia which was the equivalent of a societal heaven. This is what they have been chasing for the past hundred years which is the scientific version of economics.
Just like evolution there is absolutely no proof this system works. Everywhere it is tried and instituted through tyranny the people starve or killing fields exist. To institute this system correctly you have to have dictators such as Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, etc and kill all the free thinking capitalists who you label as dissenters or enemies. The problem is those capitalists are the ones who make the economy work and so you run out of people who are creative and hard working leaving the less ambitious slowing the economic engine.
Some will point to Europe as an economic success even though there has been economic stagnation for fifty years. The capitalists have been run out and up until a few years ago their new business success rate was a fraction of the American rate which is slowing to their levels. The only thing that is somewhat keeping Europe alive is that there are still pockets of capitalism in the socialist morass to feed the overbearing social systems that is filled with corruption and waste. To live in Europe is a life knowing you are not going to advance in whatever job you have and if you do you will be taxed into poverty.
The main problem with Marxism is nobody wants to work for free. The entire premise of the system is that people are willing to sacrifice and work without receiving any compensation or extra reward. This is a ridiculous concept since everyone wants and needs to improve their lives and the lives of the children, it is a basic instinct. If people are not willing to work or provide services for free then there is no way to make the engine run and you end up with unmotivated people not adding to the storehouse and actually taking from that storehouse which is also a natural instinct.
Without rewards people will not work it is as simple as that. The more we take away rewards or punish success the fewer people we have working to help themselves. The fewer people we have working for themselves or their companies the more we have taking from the storehouses and less added. This is a formula for disaster yet science continues to cling to this failed theory just like they have evolution calling it settled science. Science has declared capitalism unjust due to its inequality by their definition so they have settled on the equality of mutual suffering through Marxism and nobody dare challenge that for fear of retribution.
We now have two parties embracing Marxism on two different levels. One Party believes we do not have enough Socialism and the other believes you have to manage it properly. There is no Party willing to challenge it or tell the people there is another way for fear of being called an evil racist, sexist, homophobe. This is where evolution has taken us with its twin sister Marxism. They have both become so ingrained to the common thought process of America there is no way to break ourselves free or even challenge it.
The first step of this process is to begin questioning science. What if everything they are telling us is wrong and is all agenda driven? What if what we know about where we came from and where we are going is false and we need to actually question the results and retest to see if they are valid. We need new scientists who are not afraid to worship God and admire his creation. We need people skeptical of every corner of science and if they hold up to testing then they have credibility, but if they do not they need to be discarded and then focus on theories which do hold up.
The first places to look are of course evolution which after 150 years if it does not stand up it is time for new thought. We also need a hard look at the ugly family of Global Warming and his brother Marxism. One is simply a tool to accelerate the other. Neither one of them are valid and people have to be ready to take the pain and suffering of a hundred years of Socialist rebuilding. If God exists then manmade scientific economic models are chasing after smoke. We have to celebrate his wonder and count on individual freedom and expression to create the world he gave us.
This is a world built on the faith of your fellow man making his world better which will improve yours. It is a world where poverty is actually solved through the churches and charities rather than by gummit fiat. It is a world where you trust your brother to make things better and to actually become stewards of this great earth rather than gummit owned and stoned. This is a brave new world being explored by brave new people ready to explore the limits of mankind rather than limited. What if science is wrong and God is real?
Pray America wakes
PS My book explains what this world would look like.
Um, when you have to try to make a political point by trying to discredit science (and, by extension, the scientific method), you fail dramatically.
Political “science” is not science, but a discipline of sociology—which basically assumes that people can be molded into any unnatural behavior by the proper conditioning.
Real science examines the natural world, makes logical assumptions based on observed facts about that world (aka “hypotheses”), and tests those assumptions. When the assumptions are shown to be incorrect, scientists revise them to take into account the new data and retest. In this way, little by little, the true nature of the world is revealed. The scientific method is, by its nature, self-correcting, and eventually does get to the truth. You cannot force science to demonstrate untrue things about nature, no matter how much you want to, and you cannot advance technologically unless you understand natural laws. For example, science fiction makes the concept of faster-than-light travel very exciting. But physics has established that it is impossible to go faster than light. No matter how much we want to disbelieve the physical law that makes exceeding light speed impossible, we cannot make a vehicle that travels faster than light. It won’t work.
Marxism has nothing to do with science. If anything, it is anti-science, in that it tries to impose behavior systems on human societies that conflict with our natural, biologically-driven, social structures. Physical law absolutely cannot be broken, not even by dedicated Marxists.
So why is Global Warming the biggest threat to the planet if your statement is true? There is no data to back it up, yet we are spending trillions of dollars on it and thousands of hours. How can that be if we have true science? How can it and evolution be taught in class as truth?
Science a scam? Who knew?
Science a scam? Who knew?
Yeah thats why Russia has lower taxes then America, 13 flat tax on income and 20% corporate tax.
By any definition Russia is more capitalistic then usa
The weather has been politicized by corrupt science and scientists.
On January 1, 2004 the VAT rate decreased from 20 percent to 18 percent.[22] In 2007-2008 Putin, both as president and later as prime minister, promoted a decrease in the VAT rate to 12 percent by 2010;[23] Putin's allies Sergey Chemezov and Minister of Economics Elvira Nabiullina support this proposal.
True, but saying that every nation in Europe is modeled after Marxism is just flat out wrong
Europe went socialist not Marxist. Socialism is a form fascism in my opinion. Marxism is just a form of committee dictatorship.
Some countries in Europe are socialist yes, not all. Some are so conservative they make Texas look as liberal as San Francisco
European countries have very different laws, for example Poland and Liechtenstein have pro life laws so strict that everybody who is pro life should envy.
Global warming is a concept that certain politicians have adopted to force us to submit to the scam of socialism. It does not matter that the science does not support it—what matters to the politicians is that it presents a way to use science to try to get people to submit to a form of government that people have never willingly adopted before, no matter how much it was advocated. Some scientists, in order to increase their chance of funding, throw phrases like “because of global warming” into their publications and grant proposals. However, such phrases are meaningless and are usually accompanied by at least one hypothesis as to what the scientist really thinks is going on.
Evolution, OTOH, is a pretty fundamental concept of biology. Trying to conduct medical research without acknowledging the central role of evolution in, well, just about any biological process would be like trying to conduct chemical research without acknowledging the basic structure of the atom. It is because viruses act according to evolutionary law that public health experts are so concerned about primarily influenza (it is a virus that changes rapidly in accordance with evolutionary law), but also other microorganisms. Because they are small and reproduce quickly, microorganisms evolve quite rapidly, and there is always the danger that a newly evolved pathogen will cause widespread illness and death, like the influenza did in 1918. Understanding evolution is not just important in infectious disease research—it is important for any medical research. We are able to use animals in medical research because of our evolutionary relatedness. Without the common ancestry making us genetically similar, testing on animals would be worthless, since no animal data could ever be relevant to humans.
So what? Red China also has lower taxes than the USA. Leninistic state capitalism is still Leninistic state capitalism, and that doesn’t change merely because we have it here in the USA as well.
There aren’t any state-run oil and gas companies in the USA, but there are in Russia. By that measure, is Russia “more capitalistic then (sic) USA”? How about the major media being state-owned in a de jure sense rather than de facto? Is it still OK or “more capitalistic” that one-fifth of the Duma is dominated by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation? How about Putin’s recent comments to the effect that he regards socialistic and communistic principles to be “very like the Bible”?
Is your head on straight? You claimed that lead causing brain damage was a fallacy that lead to banning leaded gas. You are wrong on both points. Leaded gas was gotten rid of because it is damaging to the federally mandated catalytic equipment on cars and the Forbes article you linked only reinforces the positive effects of getting lead out of childrens’ environment.
I am employed in the heaviest lead using industry in the world and I have not once heard the slightest intimation that lead it not damaging. Instead I’ve been regaled by the old hands with what they have seen with lead poisoning cases.
Oh, this again. Evolution plays no role in medical research. That’s why God sends us new diseases to confound the unbelievers.
Funny how you can’t name any of them. Nor, for that matter, do you explain what you mean by “conservative”.
Some countries in Europe are socialist yes, not all. Some are so conservative they make Texas look as liberal as San Francisco
Pro Life, homosexual marriage illegal, being against Muslim immigration.
Poland fits that.
Economic issues in my view are far less important to conservatism then the issue of muslim immigration,gay marriage and abortion
Please note once and for all, you Cadet gentlemen, that dictatorship means unlimited power based on force and not on law.That is not the proverbial rabbit hole, but a den of snakes.
— Lenin, The Question of the Dictatorship, 10/20/1920
Marx's exploitation theory is wrong because:
1) the abstract conceptual framework, which states that the final wage of workers = the worker's income from labor - profit, is wrong. The actual formula is worker's income = demand for labor/supply of labor.
2) Marx's formula for price, which stated that price = quantity of labor time to produce the product/quantity of labor time to produce a dollar's worth of gold was wrong. The actual formula is price = demand/supply.
3) Marx's version of the iron law of wages, which states that wages will tend to equal subsistence, is wrong. Wages in a free market economic system are able to increase without limit.
Seriously? You’re going to have a steep uphill battle to convince me of that, much less the thousands of other medical researchers who routinely use evolutionary principle to inform their research.
If it weren’t for evolution driving the constant change of microorganisms (and insects, rodents, etc.), we’d have wiped out infectious disease eons ago, and true “organic” agriculture would be the only agriculture we know, since pests would have been wiped out. But evolution, through the pressures of genetic selection, causes those nasty organisms to survive despite our best efforts to wipe them out.
I don’t suppose you are aware of the spread of antibiotic resistant bacteria? How do you think they became resistant? Answer: they evolved resistance. And through other evolutionary processes, they shared those resistance mechanisms even with unrelated bacteria.
As I said, trying to conduct medical research while avoiding any use of evolutionary theory would be as futile as trying to conduct chemical research without any use of atomic theory. You can’t do research without understanding the fundamental laws and processes.
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.
