Riddle me this

I have a few questions for anyone.

what scientific discoveries are attributed to faith...

...what medical cures?

how were geometry and calculus advanced by religioius faith?

our understanding of space and time, and the heavens...how were they advanced by religious faith?
 
Werbung:
New Oregon Petition Promoter "Not Sufficiently Rational" to Advise Tobacco Industry
12 Oct 07

Early reports that a new "Oregon Petition" is now circulating are now confirmed. Attached to this post, you can find a copy of the pitch letter, the petition statement and the heavily manipulated "science" article on which it is all based.

This exercise is so flawed that it's hard to know what demands criticism the most. First, the whole exercise is being pushed by Arthur B. Robinson, the survivalist, Darwin skeptic and proprietor of something called the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine. The "scientific" article on which the petition rests is authored by Robinson, his son Noah, and the American Petroleum Industry-funded Willie Soon, none of whom could hope to get their climate work published in a peer-reviewed science journal.

Apparently bent on meeting the same high standards as the last petition (which included "signatories" ranging from fictional TV character Perry Mason to Spice Girl, Geri Halliwell), the promoters have broadcast this version far and wide.

"It's pathetic that they're so desperate to show that any scientist supports their position that they're even contacting random graduate students in tangentially and unrelated fields." - Sean Lake, graduate student in the UCLA Department of Physics and Astronomy.

But most offensive is the use, once again, of the 96-year-old Dr. Fred Seitz as the lead signatory. Seitz was once a widely respected scientist; he's a former President of the National Academy of Sciences and a one-time President of Rockefeller University. But he fell from grace in the 1970s when he signed on as chief scientist for the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco company. He fell then further in 1989 when Alexander Holtzman at Philip Morris complained in an internal memo that "Dr. Seitz is quite elderly and not sufficiently rational to offer advice."

So, 18 years ago, Seitz was "not sufficiently rational" to meet the lenient scientific standards of the tobacco industry, but today, Art Robinson still feels it's ethical to send out a petition over Seitz's signature on one of the most pressing current scientific issues of the day.

Clearly, shame is a concept still unexplored by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine.
http://www.desmogblog.com/new-oregon-petition-promoter-not-sufficiently-rational-to-advise-tobacco-industry
 
How is Scott McClellan's betrayal of the President worse than the GOP leaders betrayal of GOP members and their attempts at destroying conservatism?

Dole frets over McClellan, yet happily endorses McCain? Newt sitting on a couch with Pelosi doing an environmental commercial?

Very few of the GOP leadership are conservative. Liberals just claim they are in order to drum up support against them. Most are very liberal in conservative clothing. The GOP, from the leadership angle, is really just about gaining power through the politics. Like their rallying behind McCain. They are doing it for the sake of winning the election. Not for conservatism. McCain would never have made it to the primaries if conservatism was the benchmark.

In fact, in thinking about it, Dole and McCain are a good ideological match. Luckily for McCain the war issue is supporting him. Otherwise he'd lose just like Dole.

I have no issue with Newt doing an environmental commercial, provided he is encouraging good stewardship on a state or personal level, not more federal socialist demands and control based on provably false un-checked 'scientific' data.
 
Werbung:
Very few of the GOP leadership are conservative.
really? :eek:

I dare you to name everyone you consider part of the GOP leadership.
Liberals just claim they are in order to drum up support against them. Most are very liberal in conservative clothing.
Liberals claim self-identified conservatives or others are conservative?
The GOP, from the leadership angle, is really just about gaining power through the politics. Like their rallying behind McCain. They are doing it for the sake of winning the election. Not for conservatism. McCain would never have made it to the primaries if conservatism was the benchmark.

In fact, in thinking about it, Dole and McCain are a good ideological match. Luckily for McCain the war issue is supporting him. Otherwise he'd lose just like Dole.

I have no issue with Newt doing an environmental commercial, provided he is encouraging good stewardship on a state or personal level, not more federal socialist demands and control based on provably false un-checked 'scientific' data.
methinks you confuse liberal and democrat and republican and conservative.

what say you?
:eek:
 
Back
Top