A different kind of science denial

[Jhhnn]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_the_Catholic_Church

Lots of them.

And yet when science uncovers new knowledge that contradicts canonical belief the scientists are deemed heretics. I used Galileo as an example. Darwin is a much more recent example.

This de-funding of science is an attempt to hold to the right wing canonical belief that climate change isn't real.

 

[realibrad]

And yet when science uncovers new knowledge that contradicts canonical belief the scientists are deemed heretics. I used Galileo as an example. Darwin is a much more recent example.

This de-funding of science is an attempt to hold to the right wing canonical belief that climate change isn't real.

You may have gotten lost. I said religion drove as in the past. I also said its better that its split now. I'm not saying that they should drive it now, but its undeniable history that they drove big parts of it.

 

[zinfamous]

OCO2 will continue to provide data. OCO3 can be delayed until funding is available. No loss of science.

funding was and is available. What do you mean "until funding is available"? Your phantom King's empty proclamations regarding the enemies at the gates deserve all the attention he claims that they deserve?

 

[Puffnstuff]

Your phantom King's empty proclamations regarding the enemies at the gates deserve all the attention he claims that they deserve?

Those scary immigrants who will come to your house and shoot you in the face if you don't vote Trump. Most immigrants I've seen are pretty happy folks and I've never had an issue with them.

 

[digiram]

Why can't we have the best of both worlds? Free Market, but with some government regulations? We all know people are inherently greedy. If there isn't a check in place, they are likely to damage others or even themselves. Some even let their greed lead to their own demise. Look at people committing suicide when markets crash and they lose their fortune. One's wealth is relative to the society that they're in, no?

Why is it always 1 extreme to another extreme?

There is a balance for everything in life and in this world. The goal should be to keep that balance.

 

[pmv]

This = Space exploration from today forward.

Well, I'm not so bothered about that specific topic, to be honest. Until I hear a plausible leftist argument otherwise, I'd concede there are worse things one could leave to the private sector. Depends on the relationship between such things and science more generally. The satellite in the OP is not about 'space exploration', however.

Though sending a _car_ into space does seem like an attempt to illustrate how wasteful of resources excessive economic inequality can be.

Though, when cycling, I quite like the idea of sending _all_ of them into space.

 

[pmv]

The Driver of science is the Scientific Method. Early scientists merely thought their usage of the Scientific Method would confirm things about Reality that they were taught by Religion. That's all, it's not a Driver, it was just people with pre-conceptions given to them by Religion. It didn't take long before they realized their pre-conceptions were incorrect.

I just don't think it's as simple as that. The 'scientific method' didn't just appear one day, as a sudden revelation. Indeed it seems more a retrospective rationalisation of what people had been doing for some time without consciously deciding on it.

To start thinking in a 'scientific' way requires all kinds of intellectual and physical preconditions. Religion was one of the things that created those conditions.

I can't really sustain an argument over it because I've forgotten all the things I read about it in the past (like climbing a ladder that then falls over leaving you wondering how you got here, I just know I at some point decided I didn't agree with what you say here, even if I don't quite know why any more).

Besides, while I know I'm not being at all convincing, it doesn't seem that important an issue given where we are now. It's a matter for historians, really.

 

[pmv]

If a charity can be funded by business and outside interests, how can government not be influenced in the same way? Take gun rights for example. If companies are funding charities that are unpopular, they are likely to pull funding.

Well, look at the long list of right-wing lobbying organisations, classed as charities and funded by donations from the wealthy. The Brexiters have just noticed that George Soros is funding the remain campaign and have gotten all worked up about it, yet they don't seem so bothered by the everyday funding of political causes by more right-wing rich people. Many of which occur via charities.

And yes government can be influenced by money, that's a big reason why actual existing capitalism tends towards plutocracy. It's why libertarianism is a bit of a pipe-dream. Capitalism doesn't work that way.

And what does 'popular' have to do with it? We are talking financial donations, which are weighted by wealth not numbers.

 

[Thebobo]

Though sending a _car_ into space does seem like an attempt to illustrate how wasteful of resources excessive economic inequality can be.

I see it as a triumphant charge forward as we all celebrate science and exploration. How many young people in the future who were inspired by this will be working the in the science and aerospace fields. You think a concrete block would have the same effect? Would anybody look back and say "man that concrete block Elon fired into space got me to pursue a career in aerospace?"

 

[pmv]

I see it as a triumphant charge forward as we all celebrate science and exploration. How many young people in the future who were inspired by this will be working the in the science and aerospace fields. You think a concrete block would have the same effect? Would anybody look back and say "man that concrete block Elon fired into space got me to pursue a career in aerospace?"

Well YMMV but personally I don't see anything inspirational about something so pointless. I suppose it is probably the case that the car didn't add anything significant to the cost in resources of the launch, which served a greater research purpose. Just seemed silly to me.

 

[realibrad]

Well, look at the long list of right-wing lobbying organisations, classed as charities and funded by donations from the wealthy. The Brexiters have just noticed that George Soros is funding the remain campaign and have gotten all worked up about it, yet they don't seem so bothered by the everyday funding of political causes by more right-wing rich people. Many of which occur via charities.

And yes government can be influenced by money, that's a big reason why actual existing capitalism tends towards plutocracy. It's why libertarianism is a bit of a pipe-dream. Capitalism doesn't work that way.

And what does 'popular' have to do with it? We are talking financial donations, which are weighted by wealth not numbers.

How is capitalism linked to government influence?

 

[Amused]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_the_Catholic_Church

Lots of them.

Um. No. The church using "science" to prove preconceived beliefs is not a promotion of science. It is a corruption of science to bend fact to belief.

Throughout history, the church, and religion itself, has been the first and major roadblock to progress and objective knowledge. And has repeatedly driven back progress and brought about social regression.

Not even close to buying it.

You have a narrative you must follow and conform the facts to fit. I do not.

 

[realibrad]

Um. No. The church using "science" to prove preconceived beliefs is not a promotion of science. It is a corruption of science to bend fact to belief.

Throughout history, the church, and religion itself, has been the first and major roadblock to progress and objective knowledge. And has repeatedly driven back progress and brought about social regression.

Not even close to buying it.

You have a narrative you must follow and conform the facts to fit. I do not.

So when the church funded mapping of stars that is not helping to drive science?

 

[Amused]

So when the church funded mapping of stars that is not helping to drive science?

No. Because if and inevitably when what is found contradicts theology, it is squashed.

No. Just no.

 

[realibrad]

No. Because if and inevitably when what is found contradicts theology, it is squashed.

No. Just no.

So I say that religion has driven science, and show an example when they funded something. You say now it has never done that because when it did contradict theology they stopped it. You think that disproves the history of the times when they funded it and it did not conflict with doctrine?

I think you believe that I am making the argument that religion and science are good together. I am saying that its historical fact that religion has done some things that drove science. That is not a claim about it being a net good. I only brought it up because someone said that government started some thing and it later went to private. Religion has also done some things and now its not part of it anymore.

You have gotten lost.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Religion has also done some things and now its not part of it anymore.

Yeah things like morality, honesty and leading by example.

 

[Jhhnn]

So I say that religion has driven science, and show an example when they funded something. You say now it has never done that because when it did contradict theology they stopped it. You think that disproves the history of the times when they funded it and it did not conflict with doctrine?

I think you believe that I am making the argument that religion and science are good together. I am saying that its historical fact that religion has done some things that drove science. That is not a claim about it being a net good. I only brought it up because someone said that government started some thing and it later went to private. Religion has also done some things and now its not part of it anymore.

You have gotten lost.

Lost in your diversion, apparently. What's Trump doing to drive science? Tax cuts for rich people? Gas tax for the rest of us chumps? Budget cuts for science?

 

[Darwin333]

It's scifi fantasy & whataboutism. The technological challenge in creating self sufficient colonies on Mars may be insurmountable no matter how much effort is expended to do so. We certainly won't be making the attempt any time in the near future.

We have one planet. It's probably the only one we'll ever have. It behooves us to learn as much as is reasonably possible about how it works as a system to maintain life, particularly human life.

Nothing wrong with exploration at the same time, we are a species of explorers.

 

[realibrad]

Lost in your diversion, apparently. What's Trump doing to drive science? Tax cuts for rich people? Gas tax for the rest of us chumps? Budget cuts for science?

WTF?

You are lost yourself here dummy. I started in this thread by saying this...

This makes me happy, in that I can now bash on the Right for something on this forum. This is 100% a way Trump can push back science that the Right seems to hate. Climate change and CO2 are linked, and this is an attempt to hide some of the data. Others will get something into place, but there will be a lag and for Trump that is all he needs. Hopefully people push back and we dont just sit by on things like this.

Somehow in your little mind you think this was all about me saying Trump was driving science. Just wow dummy. Go ahead and explain how you got to this being about Trump supporting science. I would love to see the diagram inspired by Glenn Beck on how you got there.

 

[Jhhnn]

Nothing wrong with exploration at the same time, we are a species of explorers.

"Yeh, but we could go to Mars!" is a serious diversion from the reality of what's happening. It gets 'em every time. Dubya said the same thing back in 2004. Meanwhile, Trump cuts funding for real space science but keeps on studying luxury modes of transportation-

https://www.space.com/39674-trump-nasa-budget-funds-supersonic-experimental-plane.html

Who's being served?

 

[Puffnstuff]

Who's being served?

The patrons of his many exclusive properties?

 

[Jhhnn]

WTF?

You are lost yourself here dummy. I started in this thread by saying this...



Somehow in your little mind you think this was all about me saying Trump was driving science. Just wow dummy. Go ahead and explain how you got to this being about Trump supporting science. I would love to see the diagram inspired by Glenn Beck on how you got there.

And every post since then has been diversionary. The thread is about Trump *not* supporting Space science. It's not about going to Mars, the Free Market or how you believe the Church fostered science.

 

[realibrad]

And every post since then has been diversionary. The thread is about Trump *not* supporting Space science. It's not about going to Mars, the Free Market or how you believe the Church fostered science.

What are you talking about. Trump is trying to cut NASA funding and stop science that he disagrees with. That was never questioned by me.

The religion part came in because someone said that government started space exploration. I then said well if we think like that we would need to give religion credit too, but that things grow and change for the better. I also said it was better that science broke away from religion.

So, what have I been trying to divert from? Do you believe there is some conspiracy to help Trump in this thread? I will say it again, Trump is anti-science and its harmful for not only the US but the world.

So tell me dummy, what am I diverting from now?

 

[Jhhnn]

What are you talking about. Trump is trying to cut NASA funding and stop science that he disagrees with. That was never questioned by me.

The religion part came in because someone said that government started space exploration. I then said well if we think like that we would need to give religion credit too, but that things grow and change for the better. I also said it was better that science broke away from religion.

So, what have I been trying to divert from? Do you believe there is some conspiracy to help Trump in this thread? I will say it again, Trump is anti-science and its harmful for not only the US but the world.

So tell me dummy, what am I diverting from now?

Thank you for returning to the topic at hand.

 

[realibrad]

Thank you for returning to the topic at hand.

Lol WTF. That is all you have to say. Explain how I was trying to divert.