Conquer Club

Don't know if this was posted about yet in any threads, but thought some of you all may enjoy this little tidbit...

First, a story from 2005:
http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050328/ ... 328-8.html

Next, a lot of us have heard that Dr. Stephen Hawking has said that his "black hole theory" is one of his biggest mistakes, and that black holes cannot exist...

This is Michele Bachmann's retort

“Actually, Dr. Hawking, our biggest blunder as a society was ever listening to people like you,” said Rep. Bachmann. “If black holes don’t exist, then other things you scientists have been trying to foist on us probably don’t either, like climate change and evolution.”

The favorite thing from her little tirade:

“Fortunately for me, I did not take any science classes in college.”

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/b ... hmann.html



Thoughts, opinions, jokes?

--Andy

Hello, yes, why does her position on science matter? She is not a scientist, she is a politician. Her economic positions are in line with free market principles, which is really all that counts. As a grad student in history, you could probably find all sorts of ridiculous things I've said regarding math, science, and every other subject which does not fall under the purview of my specialty.

Dibbun wrote:Hello, yes, why does her position on science matter? She is not a scientist, she is a politician. Her economic positions are in line with free market principles, which is really all that counts. As a grad student in history, you could probably find all sorts of ridiculous things I've said regarding math, science, and every other subject which does not fall under the purview of my specialty.

Because the majority of constituents listen to their politicians... Not to their scientists... So, when a politician speaks on a subject they don't know anything about, it impairs the idiocracy's ability to know what the hell is really happening...

Or was that a rhetorical question..?

Hey, Dibb is back as well! It seems no one truly leaves CC, it's just not possible.
And about the story, Bachmann sounds like she needs to have her big black hole (of ignorance) filled by a scientist, ASAP!

Gillipig wrote:Hey, Dibb is back as well! It seems no one truly leaves CC, it's just not possible.
And about the story, Bachmann sounds like she needs to have her big black hole (of ignorance) filled by a scientist ASAP!

I need a cold shower after that...

Her and Palin could make a MILF porn.

I give props to Dr. Hawking for admitting he was wrong. Bachmann can and should be roundly ignored by everyone (including her constituents).

Dibbun wrote:Hello, yes, why does her position on science matter? She is not a scientist, she is a politician. Her economic positions are in line with free market principles, which is really all that counts. As a grad student in history, you could probably find all sorts of ridiculous things I've said regarding math, science, and every other subject which does not fall under the purview of my specialty.

Economics is a science, and I would hope an adherent of free markets also equipped themselves with a good understanding of science; otherwise, they might be doing more harm than good by expressing support of free markets.

BigBallinStalin wrote:

Dibbun wrote:Hello, yes, why does her position on science matter? She is not a scientist, she is a politician. Her economic positions are in line with free market principles, which is really all that counts. As a grad student in history, you could probably find all sorts of ridiculous things I've said regarding math, science, and every other subject which does not fall under the purview of my specialty.

Economics is a science, and I would hope an adherent of free markets also equipped themselves with a good understanding of science; otherwise, they might be doing more harm than good by expressing support of free markets.

Idolizing free market capitalism has really worked for the United States the last 15 years hasn't it? A very effective way of keeping jobs, especially when you're competing with a country that barely has to pay it's workers. I wonder how much further ahead it will take the US the coming 15 years. Don't you just love survival of the cheapest?, err I mean "free market capitalism".

Not a single one of you has heard of The Borowitz Report?

Amazing.

Dibbun wrote:Hello, yes, why does her position on science matter? She is not a scientist, she is a politician. Her economic positions are in line with free market principles, which is really all that counts. As a grad student in history, you could probably find all sorts of ridiculous things I've said regarding math, science, and every other subject which does not fall under the purview of my specialty.

There is a pretty big difference between saying you don't know about a subject and declaring that entire swaths of study and conclusions are just wrong...even though you admit to not having studied the subjects.
y

Gillipig wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:

Dibbun wrote:Hello, yes, why does her position on science matter? She is not a scientist, she is a politician. Her economic positions are in line with free market principles, which is really all that counts. As a grad student in history, you could probably find all sorts of ridiculous things I've said regarding math, science, and every other subject which does not fall under the purview of my specialty.

Economics is a science, and I would hope an adherent of free markets also equipped themselves with a good understanding of science; otherwise, they might be doing more harm than good by expressing support of free markets.

Idolizing free market capitalism has really worked for the United States the last 15 years hasn't it?

The US is not a free market, with good reason. Most of the prominent people claiming to want a free market don't understand the concept (no BBS... NOT referring to you ). Most politicians touting the "free market" lately are really just about cronism, not free markets.

Metsfanmax wrote:Not a single one of you has heard of The Borowitz Report?

Amazing.

No. Is this like #hotsportstake on grantland.com?

I think it says something that we all assumed Bachmann said it.

thegreekdog wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:Not a single one of you has heard of The Borowitz Report?

Amazing.

No. Is this like #hotsportstake on grantland.com?

I think it says something that we all assumed Bachmann said it.

I don't know what that is. Borowitz is a satirist. The Borowitz Report is basically the Onion, but less funny.

It s quite amusing to read such a witty article then listen to what that woman has to say... Anyway, as tgd says it s better to ignore her.

That theory about black holes is pretty interesting. It s all a bit frustrating though.. Who knows if on top of regular physics and quantum mechanics astrophysicians won t find other sets of laws... At least stuff that will not depend on a given space-time referent but that could be more generalistic.. I think it s time for us to become genetically modified cyborgs. We aint gonna understand this universe otherwise.

BigBallinStalin wrote:
Economics is a science, and I would hope an adherent of free markets also equipped themselves with a good understanding of science; otherwise, they might be doing more harm than good by expressing support of free markets.

[youtube]4NiauhOCfsk

shit, it didn't work. anyways...
"economics is not science" - David Suzuki

krallam wrote:shit, it didn't work. anyways...
"economics is not science" - David Suzuki

David Suzuki doesn't understand economics.

This is based on 20 seconds of his frequency.com video by the same title. Given that stream of garbage, I won't expect much better criticism from him.

I thought Hawking's latest paper article just said the event horizon wasn't so inescapable. Black holes are still posited.

-TG

betiko wrote:It s quite amusing to read such a witty article then listen to what that woman has to say... Anyway, as tgd says it s better to ignore her.

That theory about black holes is pretty interesting. It s all a bit frustrating though.. Who knows if on top of regular physics and quantum mechanics astrophysicians won t find other sets of laws... At least stuff that will not depend on a given space-time referent but that could be more generalistic.. I think it s time for us to become genetically modified cyborgs. We aint gonna understand this universe otherwise.

"frustrating" is an odd choice of word there. I would say "encouraging." We have to hope that physics is wrong, because if orthodox thought is right then there will never be faster-than-light travel, and most of the interesting things that go on in other corners of the universe will forever be closed to us. If we are ever to go on intergalactic voyages of exploration and meet other intelligent races up-close-and-personal, we have to hope that Einstein got it all wrong and that faster-than-light ships are possible.

I read some time ago that Hawkings said that but the next day he repented. Did he say again?

nietzsche wrote:I read some time ago that Hawkings said that but the next day he repented. Did he say again?

It really doesn't matter what Hawking said. He may be a genius, but he's just as capable of being wrong as the next guy. What really matters is, when the dust settles, will there be indisputable experimental evidence one way or the other?

Dukasaur wrote:

betiko wrote:It s quite amusing to read such a witty article then listen to what that woman has to say... Anyway, as tgd says it s better to ignore her.

That theory about black holes is pretty interesting. It s all a bit frustrating though.. Who knows if on top of regular physics and quantum mechanics astrophysicians won t find other sets of laws... At least stuff that will not depend on a given space-time referent but that could be more generalistic.. I think it s time for us to become genetically modified cyborgs. We aint gonna understand this universe otherwise.

"frustrating" is an odd choice of word there. I would say "encouraging." We have to hope that physics is wrong, because if orthodox thought is right then there will never be faster-than-light travel, and most of the interesting things that go on in other corners of the universe will forever be closed to us. If we are ever to go on intergalactic voyages of exploration and meet other intelligent races up-close-and-personal, we have to hope that Einstein got it all wrong and that faster-than-light ships are possible.

You are assuming we really need to travel the distances. We don't.

TA1LGUNN3R wrote:I thought Hawking's latest paper article just said the event horizon wasn't so inescapable. Black holes are still posited.

-TG

Did it mention matter and anti-matter particles occurring on the edge of the event horizon and how---SOMETIMES--they may fail to 'cancel each other out' so that 'new' matter is created?

Or am I thinking of something else?

He just believes in black holes because that's where all the grant money is. Fascist.