Rick Perry shaken up by Obama’s disturbing threat to governors in meeting

[thraashman]

Since evolution isn't absolute truth, you have to "believe" that more evidence will continue to be discovered, or you may as well stop looking. Heck, without that belief, I don't think you can objectively do science.

But evolution IS absolute truth. While certain details of the nitty gritty are developing, none of that changes that evolution occurs, has occurred in the past, that we can prove it has occurred. Belief is bad science. Good science is gathering evidence and using what that evidence tells you to form the most accurate explanation. If you "believe" something then you will only accept that evidence which supports your belief. As I said, I no more believe in evolution than a mathematician "believes" in calculus.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Since evolution isn't absolute truth, you have to "believe" that more evidence will continue to be discovered, or you may as well stop looking. Heck, without that belief, I don't think you can objectively do science.

Belief the way you want it to be is not the same as predictions, expectations, "hunches" if you will

You're trying to compare belief in a religious way to "belief" (quotes, because that's the way you put it) in a scientific way. Belief is not involved in science. The words your looking for I just gave you.

 

[feralkid]

Why dont you explain it to me?


Better yet, why dont we teach sound scientific facts in school rather than theory?

Like that "theory" that the Nazi's started WWII? What hogwash!

Thank God you know for a FACT it was all Churchill and the Allies' fault.

 

[Retro Rob]

But evolution IS absolute truth. While certain details of the nitty gritty are developing, none of that changes that evolution occurs, has occurred in the past, that we can prove it has occurred. Belief is bad science. Good science is gathering evidence and using what that evidence tells you to form the most accurate explanation. If you "believe" something then you will only accept that evidence which supports your belief. As I said, I no more believe in evolution than a mathematician "believes" in calculus.

Where did I say you "believe" in evolution, or that evolution was a belief?

If science is dealing in absolutism, then it is now a religion, and evolution is doctrine.

 

[TheVrolok]

He's right.. it is troubling that you can't trust governors with education/infrastructure. In fact, it's sad.

 

[Texashiker]

Belief is bad science.

If you do not believe in something, what do you have?

So you were trolling?

No.

I simply let the evolutionary zealots form their own opinion with limited evidence.

Isn't that what evolution is? Forming an opinion on limited evidence?

If they were wrong about my opinion, what makes them think they are right about evolution?

 

[Retro Rob]

Belief the way you want it to be is not the same as predictions, expectations, "hunches" if you will

You're trying to compare belief in a religious way to "belief" (quotes, because that's the way you put it) in a scientific way. Belief is not involved in science. The words your looking for I just gave you.

Hunch:

"a feeling or guess based on intuition rather than known facts."

https://www.google.com/#q=hunch

I don't think you want to associate science with that word. Anyway, this is just semantics.

 

[thraashman]

If you do not believe in something, what do you have?





No.

I simply let the evolutionary zealots form their own opinion with limited evidence.

Isn't that what evolution is? Forming an opinion on limited evidence?

If they were wrong about my opinion, what makes them think they are right about evolution?

Without belief I have knowledge and understanding. They're much more powerful than beliefs as I have only that which I can prove.

Ah, I see where we've missed you. Evolution is not an opinion with limited evidence. Evolution is an explanation of mountains and mountains of evidence.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Hunch:

"a feeling or guess based on intuition rather than known facts."

https://www.google.com/#q=hunch

I don't think you want to associate science with that word.

Nothing about the rest of my post? Go figure.

It's the Scientists need to know to drive fact finding. Sometimes, a Scientist will have a hunch, a gut feeling, and will try to prove it. If it proves false, they will discard it and move along.

Some people are content with believing in fairy tales created thousands of years ago, others have the drive to know more.

 

[Texashiker]

Without belief I have knowledge and understanding. They're much more powerful than beliefs as I have only that which I can prove.

In the end you believe you have knowledge.

Ah, I see where we've missed you. Evolution is not an opinion with limited evidence. Evolution is an explanation of mountains and mountains of evidence.

I believe we have massive amounts of evidence for evolution, and not just looking at bones, but sound DNA science evidence.

 

[Retro Rob]

Nothing about the rest of my post? Go figure.

It's the Scientists need to know to drive fact finding. Sometimes, a Scientist will have a hunch, a gut feeling, and will try to prove it. If it proves false, they will discard it and move along.

Some people are content with believing in fairy tales created thousands of years ago, others have the drive to know more.

No, because your post feeds the stereotype that evolutionary scientists don't believe in anything, and from the way it sounds, if you don't "believe", then you have complete and absolute knowledge.

 

[alzan]

Since evolution isn't absolute truth, you have to "believe" that more evidence will continue to be discovered, or you may as well stop looking. Heck, without that belief, I don't think you can objectively do science.

And when more evidence is discovered it will be added to or subtracted from the evolutionary theory because that's how scientific theories work; no "belief" is involved.

I know I'll be sorry I asked this but what exactly is "absolute truth"?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Obama is within his rights to say he doesn't trust governors about education and the governors ate equally entitled to tell him to f off if he said he didn't want them pushing behind his back.

 

[First]

So you would teach theory, rather than real science in school?

lol wow.

 

[MrPickins]

I wouldn't trust Rick Perry to make decisions about education or transportation infrastructure either.

It's not really being discussed in this thread, but transportation infrastructure has been a big problem during Perry's term.

The state's population has been exploding, but he is unwilling to release the funds needed to keep up, and instead has backed foreign ownership of our roadways ("toll, baby, toll").

Meanwhile traffic in our major cities is some of the worst in the nation...

 

[alzan]

It's not really being discussed in this thread, but transportation infrastructure has been a big problem during Perry's term.

The state's population has been exploding, but he is unwilling to release the funds needed to keep up, and instead has backed foreign ownership of our roadways ("toll, baby, toll").

Meanwhile traffic in our major cities is some of the worst in the nation...

It was bad 30 years ago when I visited, can't imagine what it's like now.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

lol wow.

Pretty spooky eh?

 

[Texashiker]

lol wow.

Read the thread.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It's not really being discussed in this thread, but transportation infrastructure has been a big problem during Perry's term.

The state's population has been exploding, but he is unwilling to release the funds needed to keep up, and instead has backed foreign ownership of our roadways ("toll, baby, toll").

Meanwhile traffic in our major cities is some of the worst in the nation...

Competence isn't required to hold office. Indeed it seems not to be on the list of desired traits.

 

[werepossum]

Competence isn't required to hold office. Indeed it seems not to be on the list of desired traits.

Along with honesty and integrity.

 

[glenn1]

It's not really being discussed in this thread, but transportation infrastructure has been a big problem during Perry's term.

The state's population has been exploding, but he is unwilling to release the funds needed to keep up, and instead has backed foreign ownership of our roadways ("toll, baby, toll").

Meanwhile traffic in our major cities is some of the worst in the nation...

There's a difference between intra-city and inter-city transportation; is the former a state or city responsibility? Besides, even in relative terms no city in Texas is really that population dense. Even Austin where traffic is largely a function of skyrocketing population, the problems really seem to be as much a result of very short-sighted municipal transportation policies and refusal to come up with a consistent policy on how to manage growth and zoning.

 

[CrackRabbit]

It's not really being discussed in this thread, but transportation infrastructure has been a big problem during Perry's term.

The state's population has been exploding, but he is unwilling to release the funds needed to keep up, and instead has backed foreign ownership of our roadways ("toll, baby, toll").

Meanwhile traffic in our major cities is some of the worst in the nation...

I know it all too well, my parents live a short distance outside of Austin.
Before I moved out of the state TXDOT had proposed a half cent gas tax increase that would have easily paid for repairs and upgrading existing infrastructure to 2050 and possibly beyond.
Perry shot it down and started building toll roads upon highways that were once free.

 

[MrPickins]

There's a difference between intra-city and inter-city transportation; is the former a state or city responsibility?

The biggest problems in Austin are bottlenecks on roads built/maintained by the state. It is most certainly the state's responsibility.

Besides, even in relative terms no city in Texas is really that population dense. Even Austin where traffic is largely a function of skyrocketing population, the problems really seem to be as much a result of very short-sighted municipal transportation policies and refusal to come up with a consistent policy on how to manage growth and zoning.

It's exactly because we're not that dense that we have traffic problems. We have people from a 50mile+ radius rushing into and out of town each morning and afternoon. And the roads are not up to the task of handling that traffic.

So what does TxDot do (under pressure from Perry)? They approve the building of a bunch of toll roads that are extremely underutilized.

Sure some of the issue came from bad planning, but it's hard to plan for the type of growth Austin has had in the past few decades. Now is the time to pony up the cash for more infrastructure.


Have I mentioned the toll roads are controlled by foreign companies?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cintra

How does selling our infrastructure to foreigners jibe with the supposed conservative values Perry espouses?

 

[TheVrolok]

TH gonna TH. lol.

 

[ch33zw1z]

No, because your post feeds the stereotype that evolutionary scientists don't believe in anything, and from the way it sounds, if you don't "believe", then you have complete and absolute knowledge.

You know what you know, the rest you continue to hypothesize, test, and prove/disprove.

I'd rather admit I don't know it all than believe I do(creationism and religion).