Ok...
Point taken...
But are we taking the bait? Any conversation is good conservation even if it is on an ridiculous premise?
IMHO Conservitism today is associated with uneducated hicks. We know that’s not the case as the average Conservative is smarter than the majority of the population but the question for me is why do Conservatives even discuss any load of BS that comes up? Maybe its the fact that they are smart and curious but it can make us look like nuts. Seems to me more folks have to just say that’s stupid...
Does analysis of the evidence have any place in your calculations of what we should be talking about, or is it all just about what the brainwashed morons will say we appear?
In my book, once you give up on an epistemology based on evidence, you’ve wandered into la-la-land, no matter how “normal” you sound or appear.
This story is just one blog post. Twelve years ago I would have dismissed it as garbage, but now I look at it for perhaps a small tidbit of information that I can use to form a logical assumption sometime in the future...There is not much in it but as I said there are kernels of truth that I can use to postulate something later when I get more.
No...I don't believe everything in the piece.. seems to be a lot of conjecture but that is what humans do when they don't have all the pieces of the puzzle. They fill in the blanks with stuff that makes sense to them.
But it could be a warning of things to come, and that is a logical assumption today....12 years ago it was not. Things are changing very fast and few seem to know it. I'll take this article and stow it away. Perhaps some more kernels of truth will properly fill in the blanks and replace the rather imaginative conjecture...
So I'm not gonna toss this in the mountain of Internet trash and I think that is why it was posted.