NationStates Jolt Archive

The only reason they stopped cretins insisting that evolution be described as an evil atheist lie in the public school system back in the '50s was because the evil (rationalist) commie bastards in the USSR had beaten America into space.
That's no longer a problem, so why should any President risk pissing off the religious right by expecting children to be taught facts rather than bullshit?

Xenophobia. The only thing more hated than science is foreigners. Once China does something like the USSR did beating us into space, science will recover.

Xenophobia. The only thing more hated than science is foreigners. Once China does something like the USSR did beating us into space, science will recover.
At the risk of sounding cynical, when's that going to happen?

At the risk of sounding cynical, when's that going to happen?

Probably within the next 20-40 years. The USA is losing (and according to some has already lost) its position as world trade hegemony; and China is one of the countries with the best papers to take over.

ya. i'm convinced china's gunna beat us to Mars.

The Little Red Planet.

Speaking of space exploration, why hasen't Europe put a man in space yet?

The Little Red Planet.

Size doesn't matter, it's what you do with it that counts.

Probably within the next 20-40 years. The USA is losing (and according to some has already lost) its position as world trade hegemony; and China is one of the countries with the best papers to take over.

No we haven't. The dollar is still the de facto world currency, and even China is soaking up our dollars. The relationship will become symbiotic rather than one exerting dominance over the other. After all, China's boom comes from foreign dollars, not internally.

who will be the first to send a man to center of the sun?????

Hopefully that will be George Bush in the next year.

Economicaly I do not think that China will evr overpwer America by science wise is a whole different thing. China will probably win it since they just have so many people! Like 8 for every one American or something like that and if every one of them just makes up 1 patent every 1000 people we are all left in the far distance choking on dust.

The only reason they stopped cretins insisting that evolution be described as an evil atheist lie in the public school system back in the '50s was because the evil (rationalist) commie bastards in the USSR had beaten America into space.

You do know that evolution was taught before the 1950's...hell, even in the 19th century it was taught without any complaint from the religious. It wasn't until the fundies arose in the 1920's that there were challenges.

Probably within the next 20-40 years. The USA is losing (and according to some has already lost) its position as world trade hegemony; and China is one of the countries with the best papers to take over.

Lost doesn't even begin to describe it. The entire world has lost. Because of the imbalance between American economic habits and everyone else's, but primarily that of the major Asian nations, we're heading towards a global market crash.

Two explanatory articles:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10206250/site/newsweek/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10206253/site/newsweek/

Speaking of space exploration, why hasen't Europe put a man in space yet?

Does it really matter? What's the point with doing that? Isn't it better to concentrate on gathering more knowledge and breaking boundries not already broken, instead of just repeating stuff already done? Why reinventing the wheel, when you can invent new things instead?

Lost doesn't even begin to describe it. The entire world has lost. Because of the imbalance between American economic habits and everyone else's, but primarily that of the major Asian nations, we're heading towards a global market crash.

Two explanatory articles:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10206250/site/newsweek/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10206253/site/newsweek/

No, that says we might unless we change course, which is correct to a pretty large degree. If globalization continues on its current, subsidized, protectionist and economic nationalist bent (like the US, China, India and the EU are so fond of), it's going to happen. True free trade is the hope for the future, but that won't be realized until those economy-killing ideas are thrown away. They caused the Depression and will lead to another one if we don't change course.

The only reason they stopped [Christians] insisting that evolution be described as an evil atheist lie in the public school system back in the '50s was because the evil (rationalist) commie bastards in the USSR had beaten America into space.
That's no longer a problem, so why should any President risk [displeasing] the religious right by expecting children to be taught facts rather than [fancy]?

Sir, those 'facts' are the most preposterous bunk that any dry-labbing grad student ever made up out of his own head and passed off as the result of honest experiment.

Missing links are still missing.

Piltdown Man, Peking Man, Java Man--all are frauds. One such "man" was put together on the basis of a single tooth--that turned out to be porcine, not anthropoid.

Radiometric dating has its basis in circular definitions--and in two memorable incidents has been proved disastrously wrong. In one case, samples of dacite from the most-recent Mount Saint Helens lava dome dated out at 2.8 million years. In another, a sample of petrified wood dated out at 10,000 years--while the surrounding rock dated out at a million years old.

The United Nations ought to have investigated the entire body of "evidence" adduced to "prove" macro-evolution. Here in Greater Roanoke, we have investigated it. Now the UN can do what it likes--but any scientist willing to question the accepted "wisdom" on evolution has a standing invitation to apply at one of our consulates for a visa.

In the meantime, you might want to consider that Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of DNA, didn't believe that evolution could possibly have taken place even in the inflated time allotted for it. Of course, he then guessed that an ancient hyper-advanced civilization fired a brace of missiles, each laden with bacteria and blue-green algae, in every direction. One such missile is supposed to have crashed on earth, and we are supposed to be its descendants. And this is what passes for scientific discourse. Go figure.

China is not the powerhouse it appears to be. They are about 30 or so years behind the rest of the industrialized world in terms of market innovation; they are simply not innovators. Instead, the Chinese economy floats on the manufacture of pre-developed products. When you depend on others to create new products for you to manufacture, you will always be behind.

It would take China decades to catch up to where the US, Europe, Japan, and Canada are now, in terms of technological innovation; I do not see China surpassing any of the major innovators at all, since they will all be moving forward without the Chinese.

I do not know what you mean by recover, though. The US is the largest market innovator in the world by leaps and bounds. The scientific community is a powerhouse. Thing is, the religious will always want their voice heard, even if what they are saying is not rational. But religion ought not mingle with science; one is faith and the other is reason, total opposites.

Intelligent design informs real science in schools. That is inexcusable, but there is no evidence that US science is behind because of it. Actually, US science is not behind at all.

What it comes down to is this: intelligent design belongs in a philosophy class, not biology.

Public schools teach everyone the same thing, whether they are interested or not. That's why I despise them. But everyone forgets higher education, teaching everyone with interest what they want to hear. That's what makes US higher education so superior. In fact, according to the Shanghai U. list of best colleges, 17 of the 20 best colleges in the world were in the US.

No, that says we might unless we change course, which is correct to a pretty large degree. If globalization continues on its current, subsidized, protectionist and economic nationalist bent (like the US, China, India and the EU are so fond of), it's going to happen. True free trade is the hope for the future, but that won't be realized until those economy-killing ideas are thrown away. They caused the Depression and will lead to another one if we don't change course.

But how likely is a correction? Is the GOP going to let the budget get balanced, or will the U.S. at large, of any political faction, going to allow a devalutation of our currency? I doubt it. Not in time, at least. And I doubt that China, India, Japan, etc. will do anything about it; the current mode is working well for them right now.

But how likely is a correction? Is the GOP going to let the budget get balanced, or will the U.S. at large, of any political faction, going to allow a devalutation of our currency? I doubt it. Not in time, at least. And I doubt that China, India, Japan, etc. will do anything about it; the current mode is working well for them right now.

We can't balance the budget as long as we keep spending like we do, nor can we without raising taxes to cover it. Ideally, the paygo system should be reinstated, forcing us to either raise taxes or cut revenue to get rid of the deficit. A balanced budget would at least temporarily stem the tide of dollars and might avert a currency devaluation, which would unquestionably prove more harmful than beneficial.

For reference, we'd need a budget surplus of $800 billion to cover our current account deficit.

We might have to go tougher on India and China; it would hurt us politically, or even economically, but it will have to be done for our economic stability to be maintained. Those nations are obstructing free trade, and it's only going to hurt us unless we do something about it.

China is not the powerhouse it appears to be. They are about 30 or so years behind the rest of the industrialized world in terms of market innovation; they are simply not innovators. Instead, the Chinese economy floats on the manufacture of pre-developed products. When you depend on others to create new products for you to manufacture, you will always be behind.

It would take China decades to catch up to where the US, Europe, Japan, and Canada are now, in terms of technological innovation; I do not see China surpassing any of the major innovators at all, since they will all be moving forward without the Chinese.

I do not know what you mean by recover, though. The US is the largest market innovator in the world by leaps and bounds. The scientific community is a powerhouse. Thing is, the religious will always want their voice heard, even if what they are saying is not rational. But religion ought not mingle with science; one is faith and the other is reason, total opposites.

Intelligent design informs real science in schools. That is inexcusable, but there is no evidence that US science is behind because of it. Actually, US science is not behind at all.

What it comes down to is this: intelligent design belongs in a philosophy class, not biology.

ID isn't the only fundamentalist-caused problem in the U.S. - there are several. First and foremost is the GOP and Bush administration's attitude towards biotechnology - the stem cell funding ban, the attempted cloning bans, the twisted, biased, religious-fundamentalist-yes-men bioethics council, etc. etc. Biotech is THE industry/technology of the near future, and we're getting behind.

Then there's the interference with scientific funding - didn't you hear about officials trying to meddle with NSI funding grants and get certain projects they didn't like dismissed?

Another instance is the new, ultra-restrictive stance on visas, entry into the country, and adherence to sanctions on 'rogue states'. Several major scientific conventions, meetings, and organizations have moved to other countries or even cut off ties to the U.S.; college students from other nations can't get in, don't want to come, or don't want to stay.

What about climate change? The Bush-commanded government edits, distorts, and suppresses any and all climate change research and evidence they can. They cut out sections, change wording, remove mentions, edit papers, reports, and recommendations, stack councils and committees, etc. etc. all in a rabid, irrational effort to repress scientific truth.

Then there's just the generally hostile, skeptical, ignorant attitude of the current administration and Congressional majority, and the vocal but brainless segment of the population that elected them, towards science. Climate change, biotech, brain death, evolution, scientific research funding, and more or less the entirety of science and the reason-based viewpoint that conflicts with "moral majority" politics is under heavy-ammunition attack by the entire Republican Party.

It could, but probably won't.

Unfortunately, there's as much or as little creative thinking in Washington as in any other part of America.

We can't balance the budget as long as we keep spending like we do, nor can we without raising taxes to cover it. Ideally, the paygo system should be reinstated, forcing us to either raise taxes or cut revenue to get rid of the deficit. A balanced budget would at least temporarily stem the tide of dollars and might avert a currency devaluation, which would unquestionably prove more harmful than beneficial.

A currency devaluation is necessary; ours is artificially inflated and kept that way by Asian nations we've "outsourced" currency management to, just as they do the opposite to their own, to encourage outsourcing and facilitate the continuation of the everybody-exports-and-saves-and-the-U.S.-consumes-it-all system.

As far as the budget goes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Are large-scale spending cuts ever going to happen? Hell no. Defense (half the budget) cuts are a mortal sin, the Iraq War and War On Terror will be made unlimited-time off-budget expenditures by Bush and the GOP any time now, stuff like private SS accounts ($1 trillion dollar transition cost) and border guard expansions are being proposed all over the place, pork-stuffed crap like the transportation bill is passed, and even the most common-sense cuts in social welfare programs will be viciously opposed by liberals.

And repealing tax cuts or raising taxes is one of those things they write about in Weird Fiction pulp magazines...

Sir, those 'facts' are the most preposterous bunk that any dry-labbing grad student ever made up out of his own head and passed off as the result of honest experiment.

No, these facts have stood up to 150 years of peer-review. Where the theory was faulty, it's been modified to reflect reality. The theory itself is evolving constantly. That's what theories do, and that's why they work.


Missing links are still missing.

More transitionary fossils are found just about every day. The examples are too numerous to list, but a google search would do wonders for you.

Piltdown Man, Peking Man, Java Man--all are frauds. One such "man" was put together on the basis of a single tooth--that turned out to be porcine, not anthropoid.

And you know what proved those items to be frauds? Science. Since the are proven frauds, they are removed from evidence. Guess what? 99.999999% of the evidence for evolution still remains, spanning dozens of scientific disciplines.

Radiometric dating has its basis in circular definitions--and in two memorable incidents has been proved disastrously wrong. In one case, samples of dacite from the most-recent Mount Saint Helens lava dome dated out at 2.8 million years. In another, a sample of petrified wood dated out at 10,000 years--while the surrounding rock dated out at a million years old.

and still 99.9999% of the evidence, even if your assertions here are correct, remains for evolution.

The United Nations ought to have investigated the entire body of "evidence" adduced to "prove" macro-evolution. Here in Greater Roanoke, we have investigated it. Now the UN can do what it likes--but any scientist willing to question the accepted "wisdom" on evolution has a standing invitation to apply at one of our consulates for a visa.

I'm sure you have. And the fact that you're still referenceing things like the Piltdown man shows how up to date you are...

In the meantime, you might want to consider that Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of DNA, didn't believe that evolution could possibly have taken place even in the inflated time allotted for it. Of course, he then guessed that an ancient hyper-advanced civilization fired a brace of missiles, each laden with bacteria and blue-green algae, in every direction. One such missile is supposed to have crashed on earth, and we are supposed to be its descendants. And this is what passes for scientific discourse. Go figure.

Well, we can observe mutations occurring. Micro-evolution has been seen in a man's lifetime. Has any geneticist ever shown a mechanism that stops cumulative mutations in succeeding generations from occurring? Without such a mechanism, Macro- follows Micro-Evolution inevitably.

Sir, those 'facts' are the most preposterous bunk that any dry-labbing grad student ever made up out of his own head and passed off as the result of honest experiment.Oh dear, it's not going to be an evolution-bashing post is it?

It even looked like a decent (if misguided) attempt to refute it, if it weren't for a few spoiling issues involving a mention of the (in-game) UN and the fact that it was a first post. I very nearly responded with counter-refutations...

(Actually, as Gymor put his reply down, maybe I'm wrong about it being a troll. In which case, here are my responses, that I had writ...)

Missing links are still missing.Which ones? The mythical ones that are half way between fish and cats (which some people seem to insist exist), or the actual ones between reptiles and birds (which are turning up all the time, as are the new missing links that link the reptiles and the old missing link and the ones that link the old missing link and the birds, etc, etc).

Piltdown Man, Peking Man, Java Man--all are frauds. One such "man" was put together on the basis of a single tooth--that turned out to be porcine, not anthropoid.That there were frauds does not indicate that everything else is a fraud, else proof that the biblical deluge did not appear to affect the continuity of civilisation in Egypt would disprove the entire Old Testement. That the frauds were discovered (or could not be maintained) is indeed an endorsement of the scientific method.

Radiometric dating has its basis in circular definitions--and in two memorable incidents has been proved disastrously wrong. In one case, samples of dacite from the most-recent Mount Saint Helens lava dome dated out at 2.8 million years. In another, a sample of petrified wood dated out at 10,000 years--while the surrounding rock dated out at a million years old.Only if you improperly use the methods involved. Radiosotopes compositions differ per-material (and the best ones for dating change as time passes, as 'quicker' isotopes deplete and longer-lived ones start to become accurate to a decent percentage of actual age). And the calibration for a material (say wood, or stone, etc) for an appropriate method relies upon corrobotaive evidence (dendrochronology, historical record, etc) and verifiable cross-comparisons....and at this point I stopped.

Just one thing about putting men in space and on mars and such...



Who cares?



It's a waste of time and money. It's far cheaper and plentry effective, with today's and the future's technology, to send robots in to space than to send people. The cost of training, creation of powerful-enough and actually live-able spaceships, and the most likely ridiculous training required to send people in to space probably ridiculous. Just by common sense, it'd be better to send robots and probes specialized to gather information.

Just one thing about putting men in space and on mars and such...
Who cares?

Lots of dreamers. And arguably having dreams, fantasies and goals is important for the human race.

China is not the powerhouse it appears to be. They are about 30 or so years behind the rest of the industrialized world in terms of market innovation; they are simply not innovators. Instead, the Chinese economy floats on the manufacture of pre-developed products. When you depend on others to create new products for you to manufacture, you will always be behind.

Unless you can *vastly* outproduce your innovative competitor at much lower costs.

You do know that evolution was taught before the 1950's...hell, even in the 19th century it was taught without any complaint from the religious. It wasn't until the fundies arose in the 1920's that there were challenges.
Following the Snopes monkey trial (which both sides claimed as a victory, but the creationists seem to have profitted from more) evolution wasn't taught throughout the school system until the Soviets took the lead in the space race and it began to occur to people that a rationalist, atheist state had an advantage in producing scientists with a technical training over a state that was bending over backwards to accomodate idiots who want to have children taught fairystories rather than facts.

(I was trying to start a debate about something that struck me as a likely development, but once again the Creationists have started pissing and moaning. A more cynical sort would argue that, by doing so with arguments like the drivel quoted below, they're proving that my initial post is pretty correct...)

Sir, those 'facts' are the most preposterous bunk that any dry-labbing grad student ever made up out of his own head and passed off as the result of honest experiment.

Missing links are still missing.

Piltdown Man, Peking Man, Java Man--all are frauds. One such "man" was put together on the basis of a single tooth--that turned out to be porcine, not anthropoid.

Radiometric dating has its basis in circular definitions--and in two memorable incidents has been proved disastrously wrong. In one case, samples of dacite from the most-recent Mount Saint Helens lava dome dated out at 2.8 million years. In another, a sample of petrified wood dated out at 10,000 years--while the surrounding rock dated out at a million years old.

The United Nations ought to have investigated the entire body of "evidence" adduced to "prove" macro-evolution. Here in Greater Roanoke, we have investigated it. Now the UN can do what it likes--but any scientist willing to question the accepted "wisdom" on evolution has a standing invitation to apply at one of our consulates for a visa.

In the meantime, you might want to consider that Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of DNA, didn't believe that evolution could possibly have taken place even in the inflated time allotted for it. Of course, he then guessed that an ancient hyper-advanced civilization fired a brace of missiles, each laden with bacteria and blue-green algae, in every direction. One such missile is supposed to have crashed on earth, and we are supposed to be its descendants. And this is what passes for scientific discourse. Go figure.
Gymour has already demolished this fountain of crap, however, a few points might benefit from a little more detail.
Crick: so the fact that one geneticist read a lot of science fiction proves conclusively that the scientific method is faulty? Rightho, just don't dare defend Christianity from the proof Pat Robertson and Fred Phelps provide that it's a religion whose members are all rather dim bigotted psychopaths. (This is a precise analogy to your last point.)

Missing links: it has been proven time and again that archeoptrex more closely resembled a small dinosaur with wings and feathers than a bird with teeth. By any definition, this creature was one of the transitional animals which (to this day) creationists with no understanding of science or interest in researching their supposed field deny exist.
Which missing links are you maintaining are still missing? Archeoptrex is the most obvious example of a transitional fossil, but there are a number of others. Most notably there are the series of precursors to whales which show, through the development from an aquatic animal with limbs allowing it to walk on land through more specialised forms with vestigial limbs into a form of primitive whale. These are worth harping on, as insisting that no evidence for the evolution of whales from land-going mammals exists is one of the creationist's favourite pursuits.