Where did the anti-science/technology mentality of American society come from?
invite response
2011 Jan 29, 2:06pm 21,493 views 113 comments
« First « Previous Comments 56 - 95 of 113 Next » Last » Search these comments
Bap33
2011 Feb 1, 10:14pm
and to have an instant negative reaction to any suggestion of significant genetic variance amongst different ethnic groups
I do not feel negative about the significant genetic variances amongst different ethnic groups. But, folks do call me racist for knowing/suggesting that those variances are real. That is very frustrating at times.
Vicente
2011 Feb 2, 1:08am
We need only look at Venus to see the endpoint of runaway greenhouse.
What matters if it takes 1,000 years or 1 million years to make our planet uninhabitable?
The idea that we should test the limits of what our ecosystem can absorb is insanity.
Cultures in human history have perished by ecocide. Easter Island is one stark example. Conservation can come later is always the argument, until later becomes.... TOO LATE.
I have hope for my species, I think it CAN do better:
Vicente
2011 Feb 2, 2:40am
I’m badmouthing the people that look at effects centuries out and try to scare the public into thinking society will be ruined because Avenue A will be the new Ocean Avenue.
The dialog these days is not about that Quincy episode where he explored the deadly consequence of LA pollution.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0681868/
The worst-case endpoint of mucking up our planet, is making it UNINHABITABLE. Not just for us, or our culture, or our species. All life on this rock could be extinguished. What's the tipping point at which an ecosystem can no longer compensate? Even primitives know that pooping in your water supply can have consequences in small scale. We should be thinking longer-term, and largely are not. If someone said "hey let's terraform Mars or Venus and experiment on it to see how a living planet works and play God and see what it's limits are!" I would say hey great give that a try. To endlessly push the limits of the one in which you currently live? Insanity. I vote against running that experiment.
didn’t deny what is a possibility. And...
Here's a vid on one good reason the listen to the global warming arguments:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mF_anaVcCXg&feature=channel
and here's an interesting chart via google search on rising sea levels:
timeline for rising sea levels
"Mar 3, 2009 - London, March 3 2009 - Björn Lomborg's claim that sea levels are not rising faster than predicted are unfounded and used by those wanting to downplay climate change, says Stefan Rahmstorf. "Global sea level is rising, and faster than expected. We need to..."
and here's an interesting article on 'The Origin of America’s Intellectual Vacuum' by Chris Hedges:
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_origin_of_americas_intellectual_vacuum_20101115/
He argues that political purges by the right in the 50's has contributed to a legacy of anti-intellectualism and focuses on an American professor who was driven out by the McCarthy purges. It doesn't touch much on the strong anti-intellectualism prevalent in US christian society though, which in my opinion contributes a whole lot to the effort.
Â¥
2011 Feb 2, 4:59am
Stating that is is completely incongruous for other people is forcing your belief on other people.
If you make a stupid assertion, telling you and others why you're wrong about it isn't forcing my belief on you.
I made the assertion that development of life on this planet does not bear any evidence of "intelligent design".
Just the evidence of a random process iterating through trillions of generations of stepwise changes, with the environment culling the variations that didn't work out so well.
As for how life got started on this planet, that's just a question to try to put God back into the picture.
By the evidence we have, Your Creator must have been a really lazy bastard. Zapped life onto Earth and then waited 800 million years to create photosynthesis, one billion years for life to glom together in complex cells, another billion years until these more complex cells started working together in single colonies, 200 million years developing into what we consider independent animals, another 200 million years to get to proto-insects (think silverfish), 200 million years of intensive development for life in the seas (It sure liked fish!), 200 million years for fish to branch off as reptiles, 200 million years for mammals to develop into us humans.
The bottom line is you have to agree that your Creator has given us rational people ABSOLUTELY NO hint that life arose and developed here by anything other than absolutely random happenstance.
And it puzzles me why fundamentalists like you actually disagree with this. The way I see it, your Creator -- these days at least -- is big on Free Will -- making the choice to believe in It require Faith and not mere logical deduction.
Anything less than the scientific record we have now -- indeed, the immense universe we see hurling away from us in all directions -- would make Its game a bit too obvious.
Like I said, If you want to believe your God zapped a mud puddle I don't have any particular problem with that assertion, since as you say science can't go back that far.
But don't be surprised while you're playing this intellectually dishonest little game to find that we eventually do.
Â¥
2011 Feb 2, 5:10am
This is not random. It’s energetically favorable and stable. The same type of interactions happen in your DNA, proteins, and what not.
We can all agree that the Creator established an interesting "chemistry set" for Life to explore on its own, in its apparently mindless but certainly relentless manner.
There is even some speculation that the processes of life are leveraging mechanics that humans have yet to fully understand, eg. quantum entanglement.
One similar example of this is the iridescent sheen of insect wings. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction_grating#Natural_gratings
Life took a while to find this mechanism, but it has been running with it for hundreds of millions of years.
EightBall
2011 Feb 2, 6:09am
And it puzzles me why fundamentalists like you actually disagree with this.
Who said I was a fundamentalist? Not me I assure you. I guess you think anyone that isn't an atheist is a fundamentalist perhaps? I have more problems with fundamentalists than I would ever have with someone like you. At least you are (most of the time if not the majority) reasonable.
The way I see it, your Creator — these days at least — is big on Free Will — making the choice to believe in It require Faith and not mere logical deduction.
Precisely!
Like I said, If you want to believe your God zapped a mud puddle I don’t have any particular problem with that assertion, since as you say science can’t go back that far.
Why is it always a zap and a mud puddle - did you see that same reel-to-reel movie that I watched in grade school too referencing the "primordial soup"?
But don’t be surprised while your playing this intellectually dishonest little game to find that we eventually do.
I'd find it fascinating if we found life elsewhere. We probably will eventually - if we don't screw ourselves out of existence beforehand. I don't see where I'm being dishonest though - in your view irrational, perhaps, but dishonest?
marcus
2011 Feb 3, 11:08pm
The bottom line is you have to agree that your Creator has given us rational people ABSOLUTELY NO hint that life arose and developed here by anything other than absolutely random happenstance
IF the only way to think about God was as a "being" then I might be an atheist. But from my point of view, I'm happy to just enjoy the mystery. I like being open to the possibility that there are aspects of the universe and life that are so far beyond my comprehension that it would be foolish to commit to an absolute nonbelief. Call it some kind of universal intelligence, or maybe the sum total of all consciousness exerting some influence on the physical world. The definition doesn't have to be the old man in the clouds. In my view, by definition this is beyond description or definition, if it exists.
Call me guilty of magical thinking. Okay.
Maybe my consciousness, and my sense of "self" is just a trick that my brain is playing on me, and it can all be explained as coming about by random happenstance. But I'm not feeling it.
The argument to this might be, "just because it's so far beyond comprehension, doesn't mean that that there is a metaphsical aspect to it." Yes, but if you can agree that there is so much that is far beyond our comprehension, then you can't know that it is not guided by some metaphysical intelligence. Therefore being at least agnostic (or even having faith) makes sense.
In my view the atheist has something in common with the faithful believers, and that is the atheist can't handle not knowing the answer. So their answer is a definitive no.
Guys, the argument about god has been decided. God made bananas perfectly in order for humans to eat, therefore God exists.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq7LXn4KSrM
Now lets get back to where the anti-science/technology mentality of American society comes from.
Guys, the argument about god has been decided. God made bananas perfectly in order for humans to eat, therefore God exists.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq7LXn4KSrM
Now lets get back to where the anti-science/technology mentality of American society comes from.
Tide goes in, Tide goes out. Never a miscommunication.
It's really hard to even have these conversations with people who can't be bothered to learn the stuff that we teach in elementary school.
Tide goes in, Tide goes out. Never a miscommunication.
Tidal actions are caused directly by God, by the way. : )
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/02/bill-oreilly-moon-tides_n_817723.html
elliemae
2011 Feb 5, 10:10am
or they're a direct result of the mother ship's pull when she circles the earth.
elliemae
2011 Feb 6, 4:48am
I get laid more than my english major friends
well, maybe... but I can describe it more eloquently afterward. ;) Porn written by scientists would be downright icky.
Vicente
2011 Feb 6, 1:27pm
Porn written by scientists would be downright icky.
Don't you live in Utah? A state that I recall is a VERY HIGH consumer of porn. I suppose y'all have the best knowledge base to judge from.
Like everything else, it depends on what turns YOU on:
elliemae
2011 Feb 6, 9:26pm
Don’t you live in Utah? A state that I recall is a VERY HIGH consumer of porn. I suppose y’all have the best knowledge base to judge from.
I know that we have (or once had) the dubious honor of being the state with the highest incidence of prescription drug abuse per capita. Also we excel at multi-level marketing schemes that prey on the very weak via affinity crimes (trusting people met at church). And having worked in the medical field in a few different states, I've never met so many nasty people as when I worked in Utah... Now you tell me we excel at porn?
Things are looking up!
marcus
2011 Feb 8, 1:13pm
Who knew ? You can process voices and they come out perfectly on key.
http://www.symphonyofscience.com/
and speaking of Carl Sagan, have you seen this ?
Tenouncetrout says "Their beliefs are not up for debate..."
They are very much up for debate if the intended goal is to replace all world religions with a Gaya/Luciferian govt-sanctioned world religion that's being pumped by the central bankers who use the United Nations as their propaganda tool. The central bankers' many minions are well-paid to make sure this is a "debate" in which people MUST choose sides. The winner will win via paid-for fabricated and manipulated public consensus opinion on TV and in the newspaper. Or even on blog forums such as this one.
Harry Potter. The popularity of Wicca. Avatar and Gaya. Prince Charles with his own nature special on TV. Al Gore and his green training. News media that regularly takes a crap on all major world religions, especially Catholicism and Islam which are direct threats to the planned Gaya/Luciferian world religion. Buddhist groups in the US that embrace "sustainable development." Luciferian groups sprouting up all over, and working feverishly to indoctrinate Buddhists.
Propaganda so smooth that most people reading this don't have a clue. If it's truth, it's fiction. That's how it is these days.
All fiction. In fact, please ignore my post entirely. I am a tinfoil nutter conspiracy freak who should be shot dead in the streets. A total waste of a human being. A relic that has been forgotten. A speck of dust in your intellectual wind that howls for a planned future.
Where can I sign up to join this global world religion? Do I get to wear a special hat?
EightBall
2011 Feb 8, 9:53pm
Where can I sign up to join this global world religion?
You are already a member - you have to "opt out" if you want to quit and stop paying dues.
Do I get to wear a special hat?
Yes, here it is
Sorry couldn't help myself...
marcus
2011 Feb 8, 11:20pm
Luciferian
Yes, it's always satan behind the pagan nature lovers. Let's all use up the planet as fast as possible, and then we will be rewarded in heaven.
When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.
If it turns out to be false, wouldn't it be that we were deceived by the data ?
I think it would be cool if you could work the reptilian alien thing into your story. Hey, it's pretty hard to prove that the Bushs aren't alien shapeshifters. Somehow working 9/11 in would be good too.
I definitely like the self deprecating disclaimers at the end.
Where can I sign up to join this global world religion? Do I get to wear a special hat?
My first stop would be the Club of Budapest's (another UN consultant) World Wisdom Council --
http://www.clubofbudapest.org/
Mission
The World Wisdom Council (WWC) has been convened by the Club of Budapest in cooperation with the World Commission on Global Consciousness and Spirituality in the conviction that the paramount requirement in this age of discontinuity and transformation is to recognize that, through the development of a new dimension of consciousness, the world can be constructively changed by women and men wherever they live and whatever their interests and lot in life.
The task of the Council is to build on the power and creativity innate in all people by:
â—¦bringing to the attention of the widest layers of the public both the dangers and the opportunities inherent in the human condition in its global dimension;
â—¦identifying priority areas where individual and cooperative action is needed in order to reinforce progress toward peace and sustainability, locally as well as globally;
â—¦offering guidance for developing the individual and collective wisdom that empowers action capable of bringing about constructive change in the local and the global economic, social, and ecological environment.
The World Wisdom Council realizes that there is already a growing range of initiatives aligned with its mission. In consequence it is taking as one of its highest priorities the formation of networks, partnerships, and collaborations in the interest of mobilizing the forces required for constructive transformation on a global scale.
The World Wisdom Council is politically, socially, and culturally non-partisan, championing the joint interest of all humans and all life on this planet, informing people so that they can move toward a world where they can live in peace with each other and in harmony with nature.
Second stop: the pro-Luciferian Lucis Trust (a leading UN NGO) --
http://www.lucistrust.org/
Third stop: the Earth Charter Initiative --
http://www.earthcharterinaction.org/content/
All nutters, most certainly. Hand me the tinfoil roll so I can make a grandiose hat. Sourced facts do not survive in a world of consensus opinion. Why bother going against the grain? It's futile. I am a complete fake. Sweep me under the carpet and forget about me. Mock me into oblivion. I am the person you hated most in high school. Will you do me the honors and torture me to death like a small animal being run over by a car? I think you will feel much better about your day after doing so.
Go on, you can do it. We're counting on you.
Where can I sign up to join this global world religion?
You are already a member - you have to “opt out†if you want to quit and stop paying dues.
Kevin says
Do I get to wear a special hat?
Yes, here it is
Sorry couldn’t help myself…
I vote for you. You win top honors as Mockery Master. I am very proud of you.
Can you virtually beat me with an iron bar? That's extra credit.
If you're happy and you're brainwashed, clap your hands!
(clap clap)
Luciferian
Yes, it’s always satan behind the pagan nature lovers. Let’s all use up the planet as fast as possible, and then we will be rewarded in heaven.
Milarepa says
When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.
If it turns out to be false, wouldn’t it be that we were deceived by the data ?
I think it would be cool if you could work the reptilian alien thing into your story. Hey, it’s pretty hard to prove that the Bushs aren’t alien shapeshifters. Somehow working 9/11 in would be good too.
I definitely like the self deprecating disclaimers at the end.
Yes, you most obviously are superior to me in every way imaginable. I am honored to share the same thinking space as you. I am sorry I sourced my insignificant opinions, which was really the wrong thing to do.
Will you accept my sincerest apologies? Think of my very stupid posts as a release from logic. A sudden profound realization that the majority rules. I am with you, if you will allow me to survive in your world. Can I be a popular kid, too? Please? Will you even consider this?
elliemae
2011 Feb 9, 12:00am
Can you virtually beat me with an iron bar?
That's a feat I'd like to see. How would one go about this virtual beating? And, speaking of conspiracies, is there enough tin foil to go around - and who holds the tin foil? Is it like an airplane, where you put your own hat on first and then tend to the lesser, weaker around you?
tatupu70
2011 Feb 9, 12:00am
Sourced facts do not survive in a world of consensus opinion. Why bother going against the grain
Please share your sourced facts. I'm all ears. But, here's how you do it. State the fact first in your own words. Then provide the link to the source.
You are just as bad--you mock everyone else because they aren't in the know like you. Well, here's your chance. Present your case--write a couple of paragraphs explaining what is going on, then provide your sources. If I remember correctly, you said you did a great deal of research to uncover some amazing goings on. Instead of mocking us, why not tell the world what you found??
Sourced facts do not survive in a world of consensus opinion. Why bother going against the grain
Please share your sourced facts. I’m all ears. But, here’s how you do it. State the fact first in your own words. Then provide the link to the source.
You are just as bad–you mock everyone else because they aren’t in the know like you. Well, here’s your chance. Present your case–write a couple of paragraphs explaining what is going on, then provide your sources. If I remember correctly, you said you did a great deal of research to uncover some amazing goings on. Instead of mocking us, why not tell the world what you found??
You're doing wonderfully! I mean, I already supplied facts (see above). And now I haven't because you claimed it as your own. How powerful you are.
"Be not fond of the dull smoke-colored light from hell."
~The Tibetan Book of the Dead
"Lucifer means "light-bearer" (from the words lucem ferre). The Sufi teacher Pir Vilayat Inayat Khan taught that 'Luciferian Light' is Light that has become dislocated from the Divine Source and is thus associated with the seductive false light of the lower ego, which lures humankind into self-centered delusion. Here Lucifer represents what the Sufis term the 'Nafs', the ego."
~http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer
tatupu70
2011 Feb 9, 1:01am
Milarepa--
You are doing wonderfully as well. Instead of simply sharing the facts, you use the tried and true "I've already supplied them" implying that you are too lazy to write them again.
But, of course, you aren't too lazy to write another 2 paragraphs. I guess you have selective laziness...
Okay, so it sounds like we're all in agreement that religion has played a huge part in the intellectual decline of the US.
Anybody been to the Creation Museum yet?
Vicente
2011 Feb 9, 3:29am
You need only look at the history of the Creationists to see they are idiots.
People in search of some sort of framework that will soft-peddle their shamanism to the weak-minded.
Classic example is "Of Pandas and People" a book which attempts to make their nonsense sound believable while failing miserably to poke holes in real science. Early drafts said "creationist" but after they figured out the "Creation" thing wasn't selling, they came up with "Intelligent Design". Then a simple search and replace of "Creation" with "Intelligent Design" and pop out the book. However this led to awkwardness like "creationist" being converted to the telltale "intelligent designist".
P.S. Milarepa, it's spelled Gaia not Gaya.
Thats great. He's so heroic. And blond, why is he blond? I've always though there'd be less Christians if Jesus had been ugly...
This is how it starts:
On a side note, anybody read "The Physics of Santa Claus":
marcus
2011 Feb 9, 9:10am
I am honored to share the same thinking space as you. I am sorry I sourced my insignificant opinions, which was really the wrong thing to do.
No, no, it was I who was wrong to have taken any issue with your opinions. Please forgive me and pray that God can forgive me for implying that stories of our reward in heaven might be motivated by something other than the best interests of future generations. Please bear no ill will, that I might not feel a continued shame over my thoughtless and inconsiderate sharing of comments that might be construed as a contradiction of yours.
marcus
2011 Feb 9, 11:08am
Harry Potter. The popularity of Wicca. Avatar and Gaya. Prince Charles with his own nature special on TV. Al Gore and his green training. News media that regularly takes a crap on all major world religions, especially Catholicism and Islam which are direct threats to the planned Gaya/Luciferian world religion.
You may right. But, question master: If and when spiritual growth and evolution were ever to occur, with new spiritual traditions that were inspired by the divine, ones with more evolved age appropriate (21st centrury) views, how will we know that it is not a Luciferian conspiracy ?
Or is that impossible ?
ps: you may refer to me as "grasshopper" if you wish.
EightBall
2011 Feb 9, 9:57pm
I vote for you. You win top honors as Mockery Master. I am very proud of you.
Can you virtually beat me with an iron bar? That’s extra credit.If you’re happy and you’re brainwashed, clap your hands!
(clap clap)
Wow. Gone for a day and a new angry person appears. Don't worry about Kevin - he wears big boy pants unlike you and probably understands that the picture was a FREAKING JOKE! Life is too short to be that angry.
I was kind of looking forward to what rendition of myself Kevin would respond with - I don't really look like the guy riding the dinosaur.
elliemae
2011 Feb 11, 2:21am
- I don’t really look like the guy riding the dinosaur
I'm thinking that you're black, obese and have a white "8" on your belly. And I like the way you roll!
My former gf was quite religious and at times I found it very frustrating when discussing science with her. One of the main difficulties we had was basic terms during communication. For example, she once asked me if I 'believed' in alien beings. I told her that no, I didn't 'believe' in aliens, but I theorized that by mere mathematical probability given the vastness of the universe life most likely exists on other worlds. She couldn't grasp the difference between belief and mathematical probability. She wants to believe we've been visited by little green men, but there is no credible evidence of this. It seems that any debates we entered into regarding science all seemed to break down to me believing in science (vs believing what the bible says). Interestingly enough, given that she is a type 1 diabetic, her very survival depends on science. I once tried to explain the difference between religious faith and science. Religion (at least Christianity anyway) is rigid and totally based on faith- faith in what the bible says, faith that God exists, faith that the clergyman provide valid interpretation of the dogma. It is unquestionable. You must believe- it is the central tenant in Christianity above even emulating the moral teachings of the savior himself. There is no allowance for challenging the religious viewpoint. Science on the other hand is built on welcoming challenge. The scientist developes a theory ( an educated guess) and sets out to prove it. Sometimes he has success and other times he doesn't. When he successfully proves his theory he publishes the results in some widely read scientific journal. As other scientists read and evaluate his theory and results, questions may arise with regard to his methods for testing his theory and decide to run their own tests to attempt to disprove or futher clarify the results. It's not personal, it's the scientific method, and that's the reason why science advances. When enough scientists test a theory and the theory holds up only then is it generally accepted as fact. But even then, if someone comes up with an alternate theory, they are free to and encouraged to challenge the accepted fact. Unfortunately, this explanation seemed lost on her probably because this just didn't fit in with her 'belief' system. I would consider myself a Christian atheist even though that may sound like a contradiction in terms. I think there was a guy named Jesus Christ and that he did wonderful things and showed how to care for and love your fellow man. It is wonderful philosophy on morals. So I try to live and emulate these morals; however, I don't believe or see any evidence of the supernatural. It is a nice notion that some benevolent supernatural being loves and looks after us, but I see no evidence of that. Sadly, I think there is much evidence that none exists. If God looks out for us why are little children raped and killed every day, why does he let so many people suffer? Yes yes, God works in mysterious ways. Mysterious way indeed. Sorry, but I'm just not impressed. That being said, I think religion has its place. I think learning a moral code based on love and selflessness is a good thing. And if people want to believe in the carrot and stick approach of heaven and hell motivates them to live a moral life, great. But not everyone needs the promise of utopian afterlife in order to be a good person in this life. I personally believe if religion put alot more emphisis on moral behavior instead of unwavering faith, religion and science could coexist quite nicely, and maybe, just maybe we could have a kinder, gentler society.
Vicente
2011 Feb 12, 12:16pm
Early Christianity had a fair amount in common with Buddhism.
Kindness...
Tolerance...
Brotherhood...
Love...
a ruthless realism acknowledging that life is what it is...here on earth...here and now...The Kingdom of God meaning goodness is right here or it should be... I am what I am becoming",
I can respect the core of that, while I reject much of what was tacked on later.
"Believe in what He (Jesus) tried to teach without the rigmarole...Piety is not what the lessons bring to people, its the mistakes they bring to the lessons" - John, 'The Man from Earth (2007)'
My former gf was quite religious and at times I found it very frustrating when discussing science with her.
You should have tried speaking in paragraphs.
« First « Previous Comments 56 - 95 of 113 Next » Last » Search these comments
Something I've noticed a lot as I've gotten older is that american society has become increasingly hostile towards science and technology.
Now, obviously we love the fruits of this stuff. We love our computers, smartphones, GPS, and all the rest. But when it comes to actually building and developing these things? It's all derogatory.
To a certain extent, I can understand subsets of the anti-science people, particularly those bits that disagree with your worldview. I understand why religious people don't want to study biology, chemistry, geology, or even physics in some cases. These sciences frequently lead to uncomfortable confrontations with one's faith.
To a lesser extent, I can understands subsets who want to ignore scientific findings that might point to them doing something harmful to themselves, society, or the planet. Nobody likes to be forced to change what they're doing.
But I really don't get the anti technology crowd. I'm talking about the people who deride anyone who enjoys applied math and science with any number of terms intended to separate them from the "normals". The movies that portray engineers as, at best, socially awkward support personel for the hero. The people who actually look down on anyone who happens to be good at math.
It wasn't always like this. We used to actually have engineers and scientists as role models. We used to consider technological advancement an important factor in growing and developing our economy. We even used to have engineers and scientists who were politicians. There hasn't been a president with an actual technology background since Hoover (though, perhaps that explains the bias...).
During the state of the union, Obama mentioned having a "sputnik moment". His examples were lame. I think that's because there hasn't been a genuine sputnik moment since sputnik itself. What we really need is a new real moment. A "holy shit" moment, if you will, where we actually see some massive breakthrough that comes from a major foreign competitor, ideally China.
It isn't enough to see a country like China simply match something that we've done. China putting a man on the moon or developing a stealth bomber isn't going to spur us to action. China figuring out how to accomplish something major, like a real solution to getting off of fossil fuels or a major breakthrough in medicine might do it.
#politics