Are the liberal elites muzzling dissent?

[arnisador]

100% false. There are many people smarter then you and I that disagree with you.

So in science we go by consensus, not the existence of a few individuals with off-the-wall views. A truly brilliant mathematician had a notoriously crackpot idea. It happens.

 

[ballen0351]

So in science we go by consensus, not the existence of a few individuals with off-the-wall views. A truly brilliant mathematician had a notoriously crackpot idea. It happens.

there are many more then a "few" and there is enough of them to rate equal time to present opposing views which is the topic after all and thanks for proving the point of the thread by calling any opposing thought to be "off-the-wall".

 

[ballen0351]

Teaching creationism as science is simply counterfactual, and that's why it isn't considered proper for a scientific setting (but could in other settings, e.g., philosophy of science).

Its just as factual and provable as Matter+time+chance=people

 

[arnisador]

Its just as factual and provable as Matter+time+chance=people

Truly, you don't know what you're talking about. Equipossible is not the same as equiprobable, and "factual" and "provable" have meaning within science.

 

[ballen0351]

Truly, you don't know what you're talking about. Equipossible is not the same as equiprobable, and "factual" and "provable" have meaning within science.

So prove there is no God.....

But you are doing a fine job proving the point of the thread. I don't agree with you so I don't know what I'm talking about.

 

[arnisador]

But you are doing a fine job proving the point of the thread. I don't agree with you so I don't know what I'm talking about.

No. It's about how you're disagreeing--what you consider valid reasons for science denialism. Declaring a lack of consensus where it exists on climate change, and asking to see a negative proven on religion.

 

[ballen0351]

No. It's about how you're disagreeing--what you consider valid reasons for science denialism. Declaring a lack of consensus where it exists on climate change, and asking to see a negative proven on religion.

Which this topic has nothing to do with. But see its telling how your so busy shouting down my opinion then discussing the topic so you are in fact proving the topic. Your a lefty in academia I disagree with you so you try to bully me with "you have no idea what your talking about" "your a science denier" "even smart people have Crack pot ideas" lol its funny

 

[oftheherd1]

Since climate change is real, basing your case on opposition to it is a sandy foundation for an argument. Conservative opposition to evolution and climate change is both predictable and wrong. The claim that a vast conspiracy of greedy or otherwise ill-intentioned scientists is hiding the truth--liberals muzzling dissent--would be hilarious if it weren't actually hampering education of children and action on the environment. Conservatives are attempting to create dissent where it does not exist--most notable with creationism/ID.

I agree there is some climate change. The problem is in getting agreement on what is the cause. The problem is worse since scientists propose competing theories. I see you subtly threw in evolution. While there is some reason to believe some 'limited' evolution, or perhaps a better word would be adaptation, (as seen in human dark skin to protect against vitamin D poison, and white skin to protect against vitamin D deficiency, or sickle cell trait and blood type A to protect against malaria) as far as I know (and I haven't been keeping up on it) we are still looking for the 'missing link' between humans and other primates.

Regardless, for myself (and no one else has to agree) any time any theory or (to me) any 'fact' disagrees with my KJV, as a matter of faith, I will stay with my Bible. I may look for explanations to reconcile them, but if I don't find any way, I will default to the Bible.

Originally Posted by oftheherd1
I think you might find many liberal religious people who strongly believe in creationism.

The numbers are much, much lower.

You may be right. But I don't think so. Considering the number of religious groups and denominations who have become quite liberal, I would question your use of "... much, much lower."

As to hampering education, wouldn't disallowing the teaching of creationism also be hampering education?

No--no more than if the aether theory, or the caloric theory, or the Eudoxian spheres theory isn't taught. (Generally, they aren't.) But what happens is conservatives pushing for the inclusion of this in science as a scientific theory--which it is not. Teaching creationism as science is simply counterfactual, and that's why it isn't considered proper for a scientific setting (but could in other settings, e.g., philosophy of science).

It would seem your beliefs are circling around and heating up the ether. :boing1:

I am not sure any conservative or liberal religious people consider creationism as a science, so much as an alternative belief system, to to the unproven 'scientific' cosmologies.

 

[billc]

Yes. Latest example...the left hates the name of the Redskins football team...Native Americans could care less...but the left can't abide the name...and since the Team won't submit peacefully, they are using the feds to take their trademark...

 

[jks9199]

Yes. Latest example...the left hates the name of the Redskins football team...Native Americans could care less...but the left can't abide the name...and since the Team won't submit peacefully, they are using the feds to take their trademark...

Rather off from the topic of whether or not academia and other institutions are blocking those with dissenting views, don't you think?

 

[billc]

Is this closer...

Connecticut Student Claims High School Blocking Conservative Websites

A high school student in Woodbury, Connecticut, claims that a firewall is blocking conservative websites at his school.
Local Fox affiliate WTIC Fox CT reports that Andrew Lampart, a senior at Nonnewaug High School, found that he was unable to get on the National Rifle Association’s website while at school and researching material for a classroom debate on gun control last month.
“So, I went over to the other side, and I went over on sites such as Moms Demand Action or Newtown Action Alliance, and I could get on these websites, but not the others,” Lampart told Fox.
Investigating further, he added, “I immediately found out that the State Democrat website was unblocked but the State GOP website was blocked.”
Lampart then researched websites that focus on issues such as abortion and religion. He said he discovered that “right to life” groups were blocked by the firewall but that Planned Parenthood and Pro-Choice America were not.

The student said he also tried to explore websites like Christianity.com and the Vatican’s website, but both were blocked. Islam-guide.com, however, was not blocked.

 

[jks9199]

Yes. But what do YOU think about it?

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk

 

[billc]

You see this sort of thing happening all over the education system...from stopping conservative speakers from speaking outright to forcing them to bring body guards with them...simply to speak at a student forum when they don't need a body guard anywhere else...and here you have 12 years of an education system that favors the liberal view point on almost all issues from global warming to religion and which ones can be safely practiced in school, and it isn't Christianity, to politcal discussions during election time...when the two political parties are discussed, which one is more favorably portrayed in the classroom? Even American history is taking a beating in the education system where it is guilt topic after guilt topic...

 

[Tgace]

You see this sort of thing happening all over the education system...from stopping conservative speakers from speaking outright to forcing them to bring body guards with them...simply to speak at a student forum when they don't need a body guard anywhere else...and here you have 12 years of an education system that favors the liberal view point on almost all issues from global warming to religion and which ones can be safely practiced in school, and it isn't Christianity, to politcal discussions during election time...when the two political parties are discussed, which one is more favorably portrayed in the classroom? Even American history is taking a beating in the education system where it is guilt topic after guilt topic...

And this is nothing new. I recall a HS class where the teacher defined "democrats" as "being for the average citizen" and "republican" as "being for the rich". That's why I registered as a democrat when I hit voting age.

Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2

 

[billc]

Do the elites of writing count in this thread because they are trying to muzzle conservative science fiction writers...

http://monsterhunternation.com/2014...the-worst-thing-ever-sjw-outrage-of-the-week/

 

[Steve]

Do the elites of writing count in this thread because they are trying to muzzle conservative science fiction writers...

Correia uses a bad word, and it is the Worst Thing Ever: SJW Outrage of the Week | Monster Hunter Nation

How does a pissing match between two writers count as "liberals" muzzling "conservatives?"

You've been spamming the board with this tonight. Must have really got you pumped up to find this guy.

 

[Tgace]

How does a pissing match between two writers count as "liberals" muzzling "conservatives?"

You've been spamming the board with this tonight. Must have really got you pumped up to find this guy.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...43/?siteID=je6NUbpObpQ-N3QjXbXjLZ9ADUP1ycSDCQ

Here's how Correia, writing on his blog,characterizes what's happened since he was nominated:

The libel and slander over the last few days have been so ridiculous that my wife was contacted by people she hasn't talked to for years, concerned that she was married to such a horrible, awful, hateful, bad person, and that they were worried for her safety. I wish I was exaggerating. Don't take my word for it. My readers have been collecting a lot of them in the comments of the previous Hugo post and on my Facebook page. Plug my name into Google for the last few days. Make sure to read the comments to the various articles, too. They're fantastic. ... I've said for a long time that the awards are biased against authors because of their personal beliefs. Authors can either cheerlead for left-wing causes, or they can keep their mouth shut. Open disagreement is not tolerated and will result in being sabotaged and slandered. Message or identity politics has become far more important than entertainment or quality. I was attacked for saying this. I knew that when an admitted right winger got in they would be maligned and politicked against, not for the quality of their art but rather for their unacceptable beliefs.

The ins and outs of politics and science fiction fandom are inside baseball to most people, though lately they've been juicier than usual. But unfortunately, this sort of thing is symptomatic of what's going on in a lot of places these days. Purging the heretics, usually but not always from the left, has become a popular game in a lot of institutions. It just seems worse in science fiction because SF was traditionally open and optimistic about the future, two things that purging the heretics doesn't go with very well.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2