Why Governor Perry questions evolution

[PLC1]

Alternative to yours.

Absolutely. I live in the blue sky universe. Is your sky black, or is it white?

You still have an ideologue at either end, which makes your "continuum" flawed.

No, you have an ideologue at one end, and a pragmatist at the other. One end is totally controlled by ideology, the other not at all. Most of us are somewhere in between, of course.

Now, to really blow your mind, remember that extreme ideologues all have a different ideology, so not everyone even at that extreme is the same.

Is the continuum a line or a circle? When one goes far enough in either direction does one fall off the end, or does one discover they are so far right that they are now far left, and vice versa?

How can a continuum possibly be a circle?

I can see how you might think so, as the extreme left in the one dimensional, simplistic, and flawed sort of philosophy resembles the extreme right is some ways. The reason for that is the so called "right wing" is made up of many different and often conflicting issues, as is the "left wing".

As an example, is the issue of the war on drugs a right or a left wing issue? If the right wing really wants to get the government out of our lives, then it should oppose the war on drugs, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Does that make right wingers hypocrites? Not at all. The issue of continuing the war on drugs is not a right vs. left issue, but a libertarian vs authoritarian one.

See? Once you begin to think outside of the one dimensional universe, issues begin to clarify.

 

[ProudLefty]

Absolutely. I live in the blue sky universe. Is your sky black, or is it white?




No, you have an ideologue at one end, and a pragmatist at the other. One end is totally controlled by ideology, the other not at all. Most of us are somewhere in between, of course.

Now, to really blow your mind, remember that extreme ideologues all have a different ideology, so not everyone even at that extreme is the same.



How can a continuum possibly be a circle?

I can see how you might think so, as the extreme left in the one dimensional, simplistic, and flawed sort of philosophy resembles the extreme right is some ways. The reason for that is the so called "right wing" is made up of many different and often conflicting issues, as is the "left wing".

As an example, is the issue of the war on drugs a right or a left wing issue? If the right wing really wants to get the government out of our lives, then it should oppose the war on drugs, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Does that make right wingers hypocrites? Not at all. The issue of continuing the war on drugs is not a right vs. left issue, but a libertarian vs authoritarian one.

See? Once you begin to think outside of the one dimensional universe, issues begin to clarify.

You write as if you believe all beliefs lie along a one-dimensional line, from one extreme to the opposite extreme. Many people are fiscal conservatives and social liberals, while many others are social conservatives and fiscal liberal, and another whole group are fiscal conservatives and social conservatives, and a 4th group are fiscal liberals and social liberals.

I can not imagine how you would line those 4 groups up on your continuum.

 

[PLC1]

You write as if you believe all beliefs lie along a one-dimensional line, from one extreme to the opposite extreme. .

I've actually been arguing the exact opposite of that. The one dimensional line is simplistic, flawed, and wrong. Didn't I say that earlier?

 

[ProudLefty]

I've actually been arguing the exact opposite of that. The one dimensional line is simplistic, flawed, and wrong. Didn't I say that earlier?

Who knows. I have a pretty short attention span. You probably did say that.

So, this thread is about Governor Rick Perry and his questioning the theory of Evolution in a way that makes one wonder if he understands the process called science. The only continuum involved with that would be the inverted cone, worn as a hat.

 

[Gipper]

This whole thread is typical BS by the Left.

Anyone who contests silly lefty theories is just a dumb ass...according to the left. Perry questions evolution as do millions of Americans. Lots of dummies out there....says the left.

Anyone who questions AGW is a dumbass too....
Anyone who questions big government...might be a dumbass...
Anyone who questions Keynesian economics...might be a dumbass..
Anyone who questions the welfare state...might be a dumbass...
Anyone who questions higher taxes on the rich...might be a dumbass...
Anyone who believes in Christianity...might be a dumbass...

and on and on....and still people fall for their BS.

 

[Openmind]

This whole thread is typical BS by the Left.

Anyone who contests silly lefty theories is just a dumb ass...according to the left. Perry questions evolution as do millions of Americans. Lots of dummies out there....says the left.

Anyone who questions AGW is a dumbass too....
Anyone who questions big government...might be a dumbass...
Anyone who questions Keynesian economics...might be a dumbass..
Anyone who questions the welfare state...might be a dumbass...
Anyone who questions higher taxes on the rich...might be a dumbass...
Anyone who believes in Christianity...might be a dumbass...

and on and on....and still people fall for their BS.

Anyone who questions the all mighty GOP's intentions and record is obviously a dumbass in your book!

In fact, people who do not question anything are dumbasses.

But, in my opinion, the main reason Perry questions evolution is because he wants to appeal o those "millions of Americans" who can't reconcile their thousands of year old dogmatic religious beliefs with their current, factual knowledge of science!

Wonder if the "the earth is flat" belief is in the Bible? If it was, would it have continue to be a unquestionable dogma? For some people it probably would have!

 

[PLC1]

Who knows. I have a pretty short attention span. You probably did say that.

So, this thread is about Governor Rick Perry and his questioning the theory of Evolution in a way that makes one wonder if he understands the process called science. The only continuum involved with that would be the inverted cone, worn as a hat.

Either he doesn't understand that process, or he is speaking to audiences who he thinks don't understand it. Sometimes, it's hard to tell just what a candidate believes, and what he thinks his audience wants to believe.

And that inverted cone is quite appropriate.

The question in my mind is, what does a rejection of modern science have to do with a conservative political philosophy anyway? Do they have to be so conservative as to want to go back the the 15th. century?

Or is there more to political philosophy than a one dimensional right to left sort of continuum?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

This whole thread is typical BS by the Left.

Anyone who contests silly lefty theories is just a dumb ass...according to the left. Perry questions evolution as do millions of Americans. Lots of dummies out there....says the left.

Anyone who questions AGW is a dumbass too....
Anyone who questions big government...might be a dumbass...
Anyone who questions Keynesian economics...might be a dumbass..
Anyone who questions the welfare state...might be a dumbass...
Anyone who questions higher taxes on the rich...might be a dumbass...
Anyone who believes in Christianity...might be a dumbass...

and on and on....and still people fall for their BS.

so are you suggesting that someone who questions higher taxes for the rich...can not be a dumbass? Because while it does not mean they are...the point does remain that they may be a dumbass.

Also someone could belive in Keynesian Economics...and be a dumbass .so the statement that they may be a dumbass is valid. They may not be one, but it does not rule it out.

Just like someone who supports Reagan might be a dumbass....they may not, but they could be one....

 

[pocketfullofshells]

Either he doesn't understand that process, or he is speaking to audiences who he thinks don't understand it. Sometimes, it's hard to tell just what a candidate believes, and what he thinks his audience wants to believe.

And that inverted cone is quite appropriate.

The question in my mind is, what does a rejection of modern science have to do with a conservative political philosophy anyway? Do they have to be so conservative as to want to go back the the 15th. century?

Or is there more to political philosophy than a one dimensional right to left sort of continuum?

from what I have heard about his grades, its very possible he just never got science...and you know when people are not good at something..they tend to not like it...Just like a person who hates sports...because they are not athletic. But how hard can it be to believe in simple story of God did it...and move on?

How does my computer send information from one side of the world to the other...I can ..
A. spend years understanding computers and physics and other sciences...or Just say Magic....And if anyone says Magic is not real...then I just say prove it to everything in science and if I find a small hole that they don't know right away..then its proves magic.

 

[bododie]

His grades in school. Lol. How old are you POS? twelve?

 

[Dr.Who]

70 posts into this thread and I am still looking for some discussion on Perry's views on evolution. Here is what I found:

He thinks it is a theory

He thinks it has some gaps in it

He thinks the earth is pretty old

He has not stated if human creation is the result of a special creation or of long acting forces like evolution. But either way he thinks God is responsible.

What I have found that he has actually said about evolution is more informed than what an average person on the street would say. And much of what he said is exactly what evolutionists all over the country say every day. Every single point above is accurate and true.

I think all the reporters out there claiming evolutions skipped a step in his family are the ones who are speaking falsely.

 

[clarkatticus]

We are learning more and more about evolution, much has been added since Darwin wrote "Origin of the Species", this does not disprove the theory, merely strengthens it. Right now much of our understanding of genetics and viral infections use Evolution as a tool in projecting those sciences. I happen to believe in Lynn Margulis' version of Endosymbiosis. Right now Einstein's E=MC2 is being quantified by the finding of a particle that has moved faster than light (still being verified). Einstein is still correct, it's just that Quantum Mechanics gets a play. The arguement is not whether evolution is real, it's just in the details of it's mechanism.

 

[Dr.Who]

The arguement is not whether evolution is real, it's just in the details of it's mechanism.

I would have to agree - and presently too many of those details lack very much support and are based more on politics than on science. But since when has science ever really been based on science rather than politics?

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

How would you feel about him if he questioned the roundness of the earth?

 

[PLC1]

How would you feel about him if he questioned the roundness of the earth?

Actually, the Earth is not round, but is an oblate spheroid.

but, if he said that the Earth was flat, it would just confirm what I already think about him.