Michael,Comment Posted By funny man On 27.12.2008 @ 19:22
we now know that horizontal gene transfer for example also plays a role in evolution. So this mathematical modeling based on mutation rates is just BS. I suggest a contemporary textbook on evolution not debunking a 19th century scientist.
Ok, to all the smarties who believe in creationism or ID versus evolution. Could you propose right here and now a proper experiment to test your claim. I didn't think so. As for evolution see for example my above post (easy to do in two weeks). If you could design proper experiments you would get money from NIH, there is no conspiracy!Comment Posted By funny man On 27.12.2008 @ 14:47
As far as I have read this blog, Rick never said there was no God. A claim you can neither prove nor disprove. We are talking about the Earth being 6000 years old. That assumption is not tenable just as saying the Earth is flat (although there are still some holdouts I hear). What does that claim have to do with communism is beyond me. Are you saying that any conservative that takes science seriously (knowing it's limits) is at heart a communist. Well I guess, count me in.Comment Posted By funny man On 26.12.2008 @ 22:17
How does the left stifle debate on evolution and global warming? That has nothing to do with politics, pleez! If you look at the current data, that is the most likely hypothesis. Why is it more likely that we have over six billion people on the planet burning fossil fuels at an unprecedented pace and nothing happens. For those on the sidelines: why not be on the safe side and try to optimize energy consumption and increasingly rely on renewable energy. Why in the world is that not "conservative"? I would call it smart.Comment Posted By funny man On 26.12.2008 @ 18:39
In addition, I'd prefer winning in 2012, so it is a NO for Palin by me. What an intellectually stimulating prospect but I guess some people are just happy to loose and blame it on the media.
John,Comment Posted By funny man On 26.12.2008 @ 15:39
I'm not dismissing that their is God. It is only you can't prove it, it's faith (or lack thereof). In science you can only look at data that you can observe e.g. genetic change over time (look at all the sequenced genomes) and then try to come up with a hypothesis to explain the data. That is also happening in climate science. However, the reason some conservatives don't agree with the many data supporting global warming has nothing to do with science. It is because they don't want to be associated with 'California treehuggers'. "I'd rather be a truck driving, Limbaugh listening, real American than..'. In my opinion this has more to do with identity politics than some obscure scientist at Middlebury College refuting the science mafia.
Some people apparently have no clue what evolution is. Evolution is genetic change over time, obviously influenced by environmental factors. You can test that hypothesis in a test tube over two weeks: just take any bacterium (let's say E. coli) and sequence it's genome before the experiment and then sequence the genome of some of the progeny after two weeks of exposing them to let's say elevated temperature. You'll see two things: they will be able to grow better at elevated temperatures and YES there will be genetic changes. In addition, I don't want to go into the obvious case of increased antibiotic resistance due to medical use.Comment Posted By funny man On 26.12.2008 @ 11:29
Be that as it may, I also look at practical solutions. Whether climate change is rapidly happening or not, conserving energy and making our existence more sustainable have always made sense to me. It's even in the word conserve-conservative (smile).
Now to the political side of this. I have to agree that the Republican party should not be seen as hostile to science. I mean science is not politics, you can propose any theory you want but if it doesn't hold up under scientific scrutiny then it just doesn't hold up. Curiously, both people on the left and the right believe in some sort of scientific conspiracy making sure that their theories are suppressed. However, science doesn't work that way; just because you want something to be true doesn't mean it is.
I'm also opposed to gay marriage versus civil unions which I think are the way to go. However, I do believe that concentrating on these issues is counterproductive in the long run. The danger really is there to become a regional (southern) party and not be competitive on the East and West Coast.Comment Posted By funny man On 25.12.2008 @ 16:37
Excellent post!Comment Posted By funny man On 23.12.2008 @ 17:54
I find it ironic that when important topics such as the role of government in the economy is covered, few people respond. Once true and tested cultural icons such as gay marriage, Palin 2012 or the ever present treehugging, peacenick hippie is mentioned, the blogs light up. Seems the 'say it louder fraction' loves to hear their own voice. Right, Left in this instance doesn't matter. On the other hand I found this post much more important for conservatives to follow than the ever-present beating to death of 'cultural wedge issues'.
Rick,Comment Posted By funny man On 21.12.2008 @ 18:02
religious or not, if you don't have anything to look forward to during those grey miserable Northern falls/winters you will truly loose your mind. Just talking from personal experience. Pagan symbols still around, hm, hm let's see; Easter Eggs, Thor's day, Freya's day and then were does this Christmas tree (evergreen) fit in..
Retire05:Comment Posted By funny man On 23.12.2008 @ 18:51
as I have pointed out in previous posts. Don't make this a left/right issue. In this matter, the Bolsheviks would be in complete agreement with you. Aren't they 'left'?