Important Issues We SHOULD Be Discussing…

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Public House Important Issues We SHOULD Be Discussing…

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 51 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #56725
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    This country is in trouble for a lot of reasons. And I think some of our most important issues are being completely ignored in the election cycle. This isn’t anything new, and I know all the leftists on the board already know everything I am going to say here, but I just felt the urge to put it in a succinct post anyway.

    Serious issues that get no discussion:

    1) Empire – Do we really want this country to be an empire? Because we are one. And that never gets discussed. Part of the reason it doesn’t get discussed is that it is disguised so effectively, but a decent media would be able to blow the coverage away with a slight breeze of effort. It used to be Americans would sometimes complain about how much we spent on bases overseas “defending other countries” who ought to pay for their own defense instead of sucking off the American taxpayer. Well, you know, we aren’t defending those countries. We are empire-building and defending American economic control of the world. That is what it always was, and with the fall of the USSR, you would think people would notice there was no “peace dividend.” But we went seamlessly into defending “against terrorism” (as if the military could somehow combat terrorism). Can we discuss whether we want to be an empire or not?

    2) Secret Government – Related to the above. Who the hell knows what’s going on with the CIA and NSA? These guys are spying on everybody (Hi! btw…Welcome to the Rams Pub!) and manipulating the entire planet using every tactic imaginable. They plant false news stories, they fund armed factions, they assassinate, they torture, they destabilize, they manipulate currency, they do all kinds of crazy, illegal shit…AND…because they are unelected and largely invisible, it is pretty clear that they do stuff the government doesn’t even know about, and why wouldn’t they? If you have spent 20-30 working for a clandestine agency, you would start to see the government as a transient thing and your agency as the constant, REAL shadow government. Does anybody doubt they put their finger on the scale? And this is just never, never discussed. A completely invisible topic that matters a great deal.

    3) Endless War – Again related to the above. When was the last time America was not fighting somebody? We are currently bombing 7 countries: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Libya, Somalia, and Yemen. We’ve been bombing Iraq for 25 years. 25 years. To say nothing of all the proxy wars we constantly fight using various government and anti-government forces (depending) all over the world.

    4) Wealth Disparity – This one got some run while Sanders was around, but it has largely disappeared since Clinton defeated him, and hardly gets discussed at all now.

    5) Environment – Climate change is not really discussed. It barely made a blip in one of the debates (I understand), and doesn’t get a lot of media attention. But there is the acidification of the ocean, the bleaching of coral, the plastic island, conaminents all over the place. These stories will sometimes get presented to the public, but they are always discussed in isolation as problems as if they are faulty car parts. There is never any discussion of HOW we are poisoning the environment, and if we ought to stop what we are fucking doing and start taking this seriously. Instead, we just let it happen to us in slow motion, like the proverbial frog in the pot. We don’t discuss the environment seriously.

    6) Voting – What the hell are we doing? We allow massive voter suppression, and we are using computers according to whatever local standards there are, and that are susceptible to hacking. This is a serious threat to democracy, and it isn’t new, and we don’t even talk seriously about creating a better system that will protect democracy.

    These are six extremely serious issues that are NOT on the table. As a society, we don’t talk about these issues in any kind of serious way. And Hillary’s emails – well, maybe they’re important – but they pale in comparison to these issues that we refuse to discuss.

    #56730
    bnw
    Blocked

    I agree. Good list. I’ve brought that stuff up before and it goes nowhere. By your numeral-

    1. This I’ve mentioned before and PJB wrote about it in depth back in 2000 or so with his “A Republic Not An Empire”. Trump has addressed this as well with his threat to pull out of NATO if other members don’t pay their share of the defense cost. Trump also addresses this with the thousands of US troops still in Korea and the high cost of defending Japan and the Philippines and his desire to let them take a more active role in their own defense.

    2. Again I have mentioned the Patriot Act many times and the outrageous N,DAA that allows torture and rendition and murder of US citizens deemed a threat without trial and without notification of kin. The black budget is funded by the narcocracy that helps bring things like ISIS into existence and pays for all the illegal spying on US citizens exposed by Snowden and Binney before him. Again, here it goes nowhere.

    3. This is addressed by 1 and 2 and it is in part a result of a massive US arms industry that bolsters our export trade. Unfortunately it also perpetuates a revolving door of military officers retiring to work for defense contractors to further use their influence on ever more expensive and over budget and behind schedule programs that fail to deliver the effectivness promised when funds were first appropriated. Trump has outlined his plan to end the revolving door of military officers and congressmen to contractors that sticks the american public with high costs and failed systems.

    4. Billy and I have gone back and forth at times on this and it is a major point of his he has addressed in depth and eloquently albeit misguidedly IMO.

    5. Well you know where I stand on a lot of this stuff.

    6. I have deliberately not posted about the most recent revelations about the massive vote fraud in this country since the election isn’t over. However I suggest going to http://www.blackboxvoting.org to learn the latest on this type of voting fraud.

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #56732
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Well said, Zooey. The CIA/NSA situation is one that i think about and talk about here at home all the time. I dunno why, i just do. I have a habit of asking people “What do you think the most powerful organization in the World is?”
    And they say the Mafia or this or that, or they might say the CIA. But i usually prompt them and say, “what about the CIA/NSA ?” — and then they think a minute and say “Yeah, they probly are no.1 or at least pretty near no.1”

    So then I go: Well, so we agree the CIA is one of if not the most powerful organization in the whole wide world, yes? And they go “yes”

    And then i say, well did you ever study it in grades school? High school? College? History class? Anywhere in any class at any time?

    “No, never ever heard it even mentioned”

    “So you are saying you got an american education and never ever at any time even touched on THE most powerful organization in the whole wide world?

    “Right”

    So….um….do you ever THINK about THAT?

    “um…no.”

    w
    v

    #56736
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Well said, Zooey. The CIA/NSA situation is one that i think about and talk about here at home all the time. I dunno why, i just do. I have a habit of asking people “What do you think the most powerful organization in the World is?”
    And they say the Mafia or this or that, or they might say the CIA. But i usually prompt them and say, “what about the CIA/NSA ?” — and then they think a minute and say “Yeah, they probly are no.1 or at least pretty near no.1”

    So then I go: Well, so we agree the CIA is one of if not the most powerful organization in the whole wide world, yes? And they go “yes”

    And then i say, well did you ever study it in grades school? High school? College? History class? Anywhere in any class at any time?

    “No, never ever heard it even mentioned”

    “So you are saying you got an american education and never ever at any time even touched on THE most powerful organization in the whole wide world?

    “Right”

    So….um….do you ever THINK about THAT?

    “um…no.”

    w
    v

    And we all know that if somebody on one of the major networks ever raised that question, his job would disappear quickly, probably amid a scandal.

    I mean…it is impossible to believe that they don’t use what they know to blackmail politicians. J. Edgar Hoover used to do that, right? I started reading a biography of that guy about 30 years ago, and I made it only up to about the 1920s, and just couldn’t take it any more. The guy was a complete dirtbag. And to think that the current heads of the FBI, CIA, and NSA aren’t abusing their power is, frankly, impossible to believe. Everything we know of history and human nature compels us to believe that those dirtbags are running their power agendas in dirtbag ways.

    #56738
    Avatar photoInvaderRam
    Moderator

    honestly i don’t think people care. even if you were able to somehow shed more light on it or there was more media coverage on these issues.

    i don’t think people care all that much about disparity in wealth, empire building, clandestine organizations. that’s the sense i get.

    • This reply was modified 8 years ago by Avatar photoInvaderRam.
    • This reply was modified 8 years ago by Avatar photoInvaderRam.
    #56742
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Agree with all of that, Zooey. Well said.

    I think we should add a coupla other things, though.

    7. Capitalism: Since its emergence as a significant economic system two centuries ago, it has never, anywhere on earth, at any time, succeeded in allocating resources in a just, fair manner. It has always concentrated wealth, power, resources and especially necessities at the top, leaving literally billions of people to suffer, starve, die impoverished. It is an epic failure. So why can’t we even talk about alternatives? Why is that ruled out of bounds from the get-go?

    8. Hierarchy and competition: Like capitalism, we’ve blindly accepted the existence of wildly irrational and arbitrary hierarchies that serve no purpose other than to make life fantastic for a few while screwing over the many. Competition is basically the Sgt at Arms for this. Instead of the acceptance of either, why not at least talk about, consider, discuss a different paradigm? Cooperative social arrangements, based on the absence of any concentrations of power, anywhere?

    9. Peace: This, of course, relates to your list via war and empire. But I think it’s time that we talk about the essential nature of actually, proactively advocating for peace instead of war and empire. Not only should we question the existence of the latter; we should work our asses off to establish peace across the board, and end its “bad press” and ridiculous association with “weakness, pipedreams and utopia.” To me, the real utopian thinking has it that capitalism, empire and endless wars will lead to the good life, or a better life, or “security,” etc. etc.

    #56743
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    honestly i don’t think people care. even if you were able to somehow shed more light on it or there was more media coverage on these issues.

    i don’t think people care all that much about disparity in wealth, empire building, clandestine organizations. that’s the sense i get.

    ————-
    Well what do you think Americans ‘do’ care about?

    w
    v

    #56745
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    bnw,

    Trump has repeatedly lied about our current military capacity, as have a huge number of his fellow Republicans. If we’re to believe them, Obama and Clinton have gutted and slashed the American military to the point where we couldn’t defend ourselves against Costa Rica. In reality, Obama has steadily increased defense spending, just like all other American presidents, and set in motion a trillion-dollar program of nuclear updates and more. Trump would have us believe we’ve never been weaker, and he vows to radically increase defense spending, including a massive increase in nuclear weapons, war ships and troops.

    Trump wants war and empire just as much, if not more, than anyone else in the duopoly. And he’s willing to lie his ass off to make it happen.

    • This reply was modified 8 years ago by Avatar photoBilly_T.
    #56747
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    honestly i don’t think people care. even if you were able to somehow shed more light on it or there was more media coverage on these issues.

    i don’t think people care all that much about disparity in wealth, empire building, clandestine organizations. that’s the sense i get.

    That may be true. But why don’t they care? Perhaps because we don’t talk about it, and the media and our educational system don’t bring it up.

    It’s likely one of those chicken and egg things. Is that apathy a cause or an effect, etc.?

    To me, judging from the success of marketing and sales in America, where people can be led by the nose to believe most anything about various goods and services . . . . it’s not too much of a stretch to think that a well-crafted sales and marketing campaign on behalf of the things in that list . . . and others like them . . . might be quite successful in changing that apathy and ignorance.

    • This reply was modified 8 years ago by Avatar photoBilly_T.
    #56749
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Another big factor when it comes to Americans’ seeming indifference to wealth inequality? Most Americans have no idea how bad it is.

    A recent study demonstrated that brilliantly — and things have actually gotten more unequal since then.

    http://www.rawstory.com/2010/09/poll-wealth-distribution-similar-sweden/

    Link to the original study itself:

    http://www.people.hbs.edu/mnorton/norton%20ariely%20in%20press.pdf

    92 percent prefer Swedish model to US model when given a choice

    Americans generally underestimate the degree of income inequality in the United States, and if given a choice, would distribute wealth in a similar way to the social democracies of Scandinavia, a new study finds.

    For decades, polls have shown that a plurality of Americans — around 40 percent — consider themselves conservative, while only around 20 percent self-identify as liberals. But a new study from two noted economists casts doubt on what values lie beneath those political labels.

    According to research (PDF) carried out by Michael I. Norton of Harvard Business School and Dan Ariely of Duke University, and flagged by Paul Kedrosky at the Infectious Greed blog, 92 percent of Americans would choose to live in a society with far less income disparity than the US, choosing Sweden’s model over that of the US.

    What’s more, the study’s authors say that this applies to people of all income levels and all political leanings: The poor and the rich, Democrats and Republicans are all equally likely to choose the Swedish model.

    But the study also found that respondents preferred Sweden’s model over a model of perfect income equality for everyone, “suggesting that Americans prefer some inequality to perfect equality, but not to the degree currently present in the United States,” the authors state.

    Recent analyses have shown that income inequality in the US has grown steadily for the past three decades and reached its highest level on record, exceeding even the large disparities seen in the 1920s, before the Great Depression. Norton and Ariely estimate that the one percent wealthiest Americans hold nearly 50 percent of the country’s wealth, while the richest 20 percent hold 84 percent of the wealth.

    But in their study, the authors found Americans generally underestimate the income disparity. When asked to estimate, respondents on average estimated that the top 20 percent have 59 percent of the wealth (as opposed to the real number, 84 percent). And when asked to choose how much the top 20 percent should have, on average respondents said 32 percent — a number similar to the wealth distribution seen in Sweden.

    “What is most striking” about the results, argue the authors, is that they show “more consensus than disagreement among … different demographic groups. All groups – even the wealthiest respondents – desired a more equal distribution of wealth than what they estimated the current United States level to be, while all groups also desired some inequality – even the poorest respondents.”

    The authors suggest the reason that American voters have not made more of an issue of the growing income gap is that they may simply not be aware of it. “Second, just as people have erroneous beliefs about the actual level of wealth inequality, they may also hold overly optimistic beliefs about opportunities for social mobility in the United States, beliefs which in turn may drive support for unequal distributions of wealth,” they write.

    The authors also note that, though there may be widespread agreement about income inequality, there is no agreement on what caused it or what should be done about it.

    “Americans exhibit a general disconnect between their attitudes towards economic inequality and their self-interest and public policy preferences, suggesting that even given increased awareness of the gap between ideal and actual wealth distributions, Americans may remain unlikely to advocate for policies that would narrow this gap,” the authors argue.

    Norton and Ariely’s survey was carried out on 5,522 respondents in 47 states in December of 2005. The results are to be published in the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science.

    • This reply was modified 8 years ago by Avatar photoBilly_T.
    #56753
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Right now, the richest 20 Americans hold more wealth than half the population. The richest 1% holds more than the bottom 99% combined. Worldwide, just 60 people hold more wealth than the bottom half of the world’s population — as in, roughly 3.5 BILLION people.

    To me, that’s obscene.

    Another likely factor in the indifference of some when it comes to inequality: They don’t get that wealth held by the rich is wealth no one else can then hold. Wealth is finite. Assets are finite. Money supply is finite. Payrolls are finite. A billionaire’s money can’t exist in his or her pocket and yours at the same time . . . so their wealth automatically and necessarily diminishes yours. That’s just math. A billion dollars in John Doe’s hand is a billion dollars taken out of the pool for anyone else.

    Again, it’s just math. And too many Americans can’t seem to do math.

    #56755
    Avatar photoInvaderRam
    Moderator

    honestly i don’t think people care. even if you were able to somehow shed more light on it or there was more media coverage on these issues.

    i don’t think people care all that much about disparity in wealth, empire building, clandestine organizations. that’s the sense i get.

    ————-
    Well what do you think Americans ‘do’ care about?

    w
    v

    i think people are interested in protecting what’s theirs.

    i think they like the notion of equality but not at the expense of their own security.

    or maybe i’m just feeling really pessimistic these days.

    • This reply was modified 8 years ago by Avatar photoInvaderRam.
    #56759
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I have a slightly different take on Wealth Disparity.

    I think Americans DO care about it a lot. They just don’t call it that. It is, in fact, a principal complaint of Trump supporters, but they see it as offshoring their jobs, and so on. But calling it Wealth Disparity violates their belief that “anybody can make it in America through hard work, etc.” It sounds like a “liberal” complaint, as if the solution is higher taxes, or something. So they don’t trust the term. They don’t see the connection between problems inherent in the system and where they are. They see their circumstances as exceptional to the rule somehow.

    #56760
    bnw
    Blocked

    Another big factor when it comes to Americans’ seeming indifference to wealth inequality? Most Americans have no idea how bad it is.

    A recent study demonstrated that brilliantly — and things have actually gotten more unequal since then.

    http://www.rawstory.com/2010/09/poll-wealth-distribution-similar-sweden/

    Link to the original study itself:

    http://www.people.hbs.edu/mnorton/norton%20ariely%20in%20press.pdf

    92 percent prefer Swedish model to US model when given a choice

    Americans generally underestimate the degree of income inequality in the United States, and if given a choice, would distribute wealth in a similar way to the social democracies of Scandinavia, a new study finds.

    For decades, polls have shown that a plurality of Americans — around 40 percent — consider themselves conservative, while only around 20 percent self-identify as liberals. But a new study from two noted economists casts doubt on what values lie beneath those political labels.

    According to research (PDF) carried out by Michael I. Norton of Harvard Business School and Dan Ariely of Duke University, and flagged by Paul Kedrosky at the Infectious Greed blog, 92 percent of Americans would choose to live in a society with far less income disparity than the US, choosing Sweden’s model over that of the US.

    What’s more, the study’s authors say that this applies to people of all income levels and all political leanings: The poor and the rich, Democrats and Republicans are all equally likely to choose the Swedish model.

    But the study also found that respondents preferred Sweden’s model over a model of perfect income equality for everyone, “suggesting that Americans prefer some inequality to perfect equality, but not to the degree currently present in the United States,” the authors state.

    Recent analyses have shown that income inequality in the US has grown steadily for the past three decades and reached its highest level on record, exceeding even the large disparities seen in the 1920s, before the Great Depression. Norton and Ariely estimate that the one percent wealthiest Americans hold nearly 50 percent of the country’s wealth, while the richest 20 percent hold 84 percent of the wealth.

    But in their study, the authors found Americans generally underestimate the income disparity. When asked to estimate, respondents on average estimated that the top 20 percent have 59 percent of the wealth (as opposed to the real number, 84 percent). And when asked to choose how much the top 20 percent should have, on average respondents said 32 percent — a number similar to the wealth distribution seen in Sweden.

    “What is most striking” about the results, argue the authors, is that they show “more consensus than disagreement among … different demographic groups. All groups – even the wealthiest respondents – desired a more equal distribution of wealth than what they estimated the current United States level to be, while all groups also desired some inequality – even the poorest respondents.”

    The authors suggest the reason that American voters have not made more of an issue of the growing income gap is that they may simply not be aware of it. “Second, just as people have erroneous beliefs about the actual level of wealth inequality, they may also hold overly optimistic beliefs about opportunities for social mobility in the United States, beliefs which in turn may drive support for unequal distributions of wealth,” they write.

    The authors also note that, though there may be widespread agreement about income inequality, there is no agreement on what caused it or what should be done about it.

    “Americans exhibit a general disconnect between their attitudes towards economic inequality and their self-interest and public policy preferences, suggesting that even given increased awareness of the gap between ideal and actual wealth distributions, Americans may remain unlikely to advocate for policies that would narrow this gap,” the authors argue.

    Norton and Ariely’s survey was carried out on 5,522 respondents in 47 states in December of 2005. The results are to be published in the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science.

    Great example. Sweden. They have self destructed since 2005.

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #56761
    Avatar photoInvaderRam
    Moderator

    Right now, the richest 20 Americans hold more wealth than half the population. The richest 1% holds more than the bottom 99% combined. Worldwide, just 60 people hold more wealth than the bottom half of the world’s population — as in, roughly 3.5 BILLION people.

    To me, that’s obscene.

    Another likely factor in the indifference of some when it comes to inequality: They don’t get that wealth held by the rich is wealth no one else can then hold. Wealth is finite. Assets are finite. Money supply is finite. Payrolls are finite. A billionaire’s money can’t exist in his or her pocket and yours at the same time . . . so their wealth automatically and necessarily diminishes yours. That’s just math. A billion dollars in John Doe’s hand is a billion dollars taken out of the pool for anyone else.

    Again, it’s just math. And too many Americans can’t seem to do math.

    ya know. i say some of these things to people. how the number of billionaires increases every year. and the number of poor grows even higher.

    most people shrug. or there’s a sense of resignation. the rich are going to do what they want, and we are powerless to stop it. a few even place the blame on the poor for taking their money from welfare and government assistance and whatnot and no mention of the rich and their greed.

    i have no idea why that is. yeah a lot of it might be a result of indoctrination or just ignorance. but i think also. on some level. humans are just pieces of shit.

    i mean can clinton or trump really help who they are? they just are who they are. i don’t think they’re evil. i think they’re no more evil than the “oppressed poor people”.

    they just do what they do and have no idea why they do what they do just like every other human on the planet and the result is just one big hot mess.

    perhaps i’m making no sense right now. just rambling.

    • This reply was modified 8 years ago by Avatar photoInvaderRam.
    #56763
    Avatar photoInvaderRam
    Moderator

    But calling it Wealth Disparity violates their belief that “anybody can make it in America through hard work, etc.” It sounds like a “liberal” complaint, as if the solution is higher taxes, or something.

    yeah. that’s a big part of it. the blame is put on the people who fail. no recognition of the fact that maybe they’re being shat on.

    #56770
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    i have no idea why that is. yeah a lot of it might be a result of indoctrination or just ignorance. but i think also. on some level. humans are just pieces of shit.

    i mean can clinton or trump really help who they are? they just are who they are. i don’t think they’re evil. i think they’re no more evil than the “oppressed poor people”.

    they just do what they do and have no idea why they do what they do just like every other human on the planet and the result is just one big hot mess.

    perhaps i’m making no sense right now. just rambling.

    Which is why I think we are just doomed. This is kind of Vonnegut stuff. We are all just kind of self-absorbed and too tired to take on every complicated issue, and we just line up in shorthand ways, and bad stuff happens as a result.

    #56775
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    i have no idea why that is. yeah a lot of it might be a result of indoctrination or just ignorance. but i think also. on some level. humans are just pieces of shit.

    i mean can clinton or trump really help who they are? they just are who they are. i don’t think they’re evil. i think they’re no more evil than the “oppressed poor people”.

    they just do what they do and have no idea why they do what they do just like every other human on the planet and the result is just one big hot mess.

    perhaps i’m making no sense right now. just rambling.

    ————————

    Well, I’d say yes-and-no
    to that myself. In one sense, Yes the talking-monkeys are barely-evolved creatures with primitive drives and impulses and atavistic survival mechanisms…or to put it your way “pieces of shit”.

    But then again, there ARE countries full of humans that are doing things much better than other countries full of humans. Ya know. Policies can make humans better and policies can make humans worse. Seems to me corporate-capitalism makes humans worse, than, say whatever system they have in Finland and Norway and France, etc.

    I dunno. I’m mainly a ‘system-blamer’. Though, I also keep one eye on ‘biology/evolution’ etc. I mean it does seem purty obvious that humans are a limited, half-assed species, so far.

    w
    v

    #56776
    Avatar photoInvaderRam
    Moderator

    on a small scale of 5 million or even 10 million i can see it working. but on a scale of 7 billion with all sorts of different belief systems and interests i think it breaks down.

    so i understand and agree with the idea that systems can make people better or worse, but i also think that people affect the system as well. not just a one way street.

    #56785
    PA Ram
    Participant

    One other thing I’d add:

    Junk Science

    Whether it’s creation science, bought and paid for oil company science, a war on science and intellectualism–you name it.

    The country is misled, dumbed down, and wondering in circles with bad information.

    Not good.

    • This reply was modified 8 years ago by PA Ram.

    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. " Philip K. Dick

    #56788
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    on a small scale of 5 million or even 10 million i can see it working. but on a scale of 7 billion with all sorts of different belief systems and interests i think it breaks down.

    so i understand and agree with the idea that systems can make people better or worse, but i also think that people affect the system as well. not just a one way street.

    ————
    Well thats why we need a relatively small meteor.
    And we need one fast.

    w
    v

    #56811
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    One other thing I’d add:

    Junk Science

    Whether it’s creation science, bought and paid for oil company science, a war on science and intellectualism–you name it.

    The country is misled, dumbed down, and wondering in circles with bad information.

    Not good.

    I think what you are describing here is an ignorance that is pervasive in our society amongst people who didn’t actually absorb a sufficient amount of education.

    There is a wide belief that “everyone is entitled to an opinion,” and that therefore all opinions are just more or less equal. You know, “you’ve got some facts; I’ve got some facts. We have each made up an opinion.”

    I think this is what underlies the climate change denial in this country. People who deny climate change just don’t understand how scientific knowledge grows. They don’t understand academia. To some of them, academia is a bunch of “la-di-da” fancy pants who don’t live in the “real” world. Who are somehow detached from reality, and live with their heads in a cloud of big words and a sense of superiority. They don’t understand that people study the hell out of something, and take a huge risk in publishing it, opening it up to the scrutiny of really smart people all over the planet who have studied the hell out of the same thing, and are going to critique that study, and publish their opinions on it. There is a global conversation going on amongst the experts on any given subject, all the time. Theories get posited and get reviewed and re-tested and probed and prodded by experts. And consensus develops that way. That is how it works.

    And along comes somebody who says, “Yeah, that’s not true! My opinion is as good as yours anyway.”

    So I don’t know what you do about that. It would be nice if the media would stop pretending like all opinions need to be presented with equal weight.

    #56817
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    One other thing I’d add:

    Junk Science

    Whether it’s creation science, bought and paid for oil company science, a war on science and intellectualism–you name it.

    The country is misled, dumbed down, and wondering in circles with bad information.

    Not good.

    I think what you are describing here is an ignorance that is pervasive in our society amongst people who didn’t actually absorb a sufficient amount of education.

    There is a wide belief that “everyone is entitled to an opinion,” and that therefore all opinions are just more or less equal. You know, “you’ve got some facts; I’ve got some facts. We have each made up an opinion.”

    I think this is what underlies the climate change denial in this country. People who deny climate change just don’t understand how scientific knowledge grows. They don’t understand academia. To some of them, academia is a bunch of “la-di-da” fancy pants who don’t live in the “real” world. Who are somehow detached from reality, and live with their heads in a cloud of big words and a sense of superiority. They don’t understand that people study the hell out of something, and take a huge risk in publishing it, opening it up to the scrutiny of really smart people all over the planet who have studied the hell out of the same thing, and are going to critique that study, and publish their opinions on it. There is a global conversation going on amongst the experts on any given subject, all the time. Theories get posited and get reviewed and re-tested and probed and prodded by experts. And consensus develops that way. That is how it works.

    And along comes somebody who says, “Yeah, that’s not true! My opinion is as good as yours anyway.”

    So I don’t know what you do about that. It would be nice if the media would stop pretending like all opinions need to be presented with equal weight.

    ————–

    wv-mom was a scientist in her younger days. Worked an electron microscope. Did all kinds of sciency stuff for a living for thirty years or so.

    She’s now a climate-change-denier of sorts because she interprets ‘everything’ through her understanding of the rightwing-christian-fundamentalist-Bible.

    Humans. Religion.

    w
    v

    #56819
    bnw
    Blocked

    The data alone disproves manmade global warming. The alarmists failed predictions disproves manmade global warming.

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #56821
    Avatar photonittany ram
    Moderator

    One other thing I’d add:

    Junk Science

    Whether it’s creation science, bought and paid for oil company science, a war on science and intellectualism–you name it.

    The country is misled, dumbed down, and wondering in circles with bad information.

    Not good.

    I think what you are describing here is an ignorance that is pervasive in our society amongst people who didn’t actually absorb a sufficient amount of education.

    There is a wide belief that “everyone is entitled to an opinion,” and that therefore all opinions are just more or less equal. You know, “you’ve got some facts; I’ve got some facts. We have each made up an opinion.”

    I think this is what underlies the climate change denial in this country. People who deny climate change just don’t understand how scientific knowledge grows. They don’t understand academia. To some of them, academia is a bunch of “la-di-da” fancy pants who don’t live in the “real” world. Who are somehow detached from reality, and live with their heads in a cloud of big words and a sense of superiority. They don’t understand that people study the hell out of something, and take a huge risk in publishing it, opening it up to the scrutiny of really smart people all over the planet who have studied the hell out of the same thing, and are going to critique that study, and publish their opinions on it. There is a global conversation going on amongst the experts on any given subject, all the time. Theories get posited and get reviewed and re-tested and probed and prodded by experts. And consensus develops that way. That is how it works.

    And along comes somebody who says, “Yeah, that’s not true! My opinion is as good as yours anyway.”

    So I don’t know what you do about that. It would be nice if the media would stop pretending like all opinions need to be presented with equal weight.

    Yes, there’s a false equivalency.

    It’s what elevates the biblical account of creation to the same level as the scientific account.

    Many people will tell you that the creation interpretation is equally as valid as the scientific one but of course it’s not.

    One is a story from the Bronze Age that has been passed down unchanged through the generations without being questioned by its proponents.

    The other is the result of rigorous investigative work that is backed by evidence and is continually evolving as new evidence comes to light. It doesn’t claim to be right. It just claims to be the best interpretation based on the evidence.

    And I agree about education levels being at the root of this. I’m sure you would find that on overage creationists have a lot less education than non-creationists.

    But it’s not just a lack of education. It can also just be about perception. For example, many anti-GMO and anti-vaccination people are highly educated. But even the highly educated can be duped by their own belief systems and by the prevailing propaganda that’s often based on junk science.

    You mentioned climate change and you correctly described the years of hard work and research among many different climate scientists that led it to become a scientific consensus. Well, the same applies to GMO technology and there’s actually a bigger consensus among scientists that GMOs are safe than there is that man-made climate change is happening, yet many people, many of them highly educated, continue to believe they are unsafe or the ‘jury’s still out’.

    I think it’s easier for people to believe in climate change. Climate is easy to understand. It’s less abstract. Most people, even educated ones, don’t know a lot about genetics and a lot of what they do know has been corrupted by bad science fiction stories. Because of that, people are unduly afraid of genetics research and the products of that research.

    #56822
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    You mentioned climate change and you correctly described the years of hard work and research among many different climate scientists that led it to become a scientific consensus. Well, the same applies to GMO technology and there’s actually a bigger consensus among scientists that GMOs are safe than there is that man-made climate change is happening, yet many people, many of them highly educated, continue to believe they are unsafe or the ‘jury’s still out’.

    Ennnnh, yeah. I don’t think they are comparable. Because GMOs have a lot more tangled up in them beyond just the question of whether or not they are safe.

    GMOs are clouded by the fact that, currently, corporations can OWN a GMO. And there is a LOT of ugliness that comes with that simple legal aspect. If you removed ownership of GMO patents from the equation, I think you would see resistance to GMOs drop precipitously.

    And it isn’t just Seed control. It’s the shaping of GMOs to tolerate widespread poisonous chemical distribution that makes people uneasy about them. It’s a bigger thing. And food is just more “personal” to begin with.

    #56823
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    The data alone disproves manmade global warming. The alarmists failed predictions disproves manmade global warming.

    Yeah…no, it doesn’t.

    And the fact that the United States of America is the ONLY country on earth where anybody even DEBATES this topic anymore ought to hint at something to you.

    But…carry on.

    If you are right, we will have spent a lot of effort making the planet a better place for nothing.

    #56835
    bnw
    Blocked

    The data alone disproves manmade global warming. The alarmists failed predictions disproves manmade global warming.

    Yeah…no, it doesn’t.

    And the fact that the United States of America is the ONLY country on earth where anybody even DEBATES this topic anymore ought to hint at something to you.

    But…carry on.

    If you are right, we will have spent a lot of effort making the planet a better place for nothing.

    This isn’t a “hint”. Your “fact” is BS. Please do tell how your efforts make the planet “a better place”! Wow.

    • This reply was modified 8 years ago by bnw.

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #56837
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    This isn’t a “hint”. Your “fact” is BS. Please do tell how your efforts make the planet “a better place”! Wow.

    ————-
    Well, even if climate-change was a myth, dont you think cutting down on pollution
    and moving towards less-toxic energy sources would be good for the plants, animals and talking-monkeys?

    w
    v

    #56838
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    The data alone disproves manmade global warming. The alarmists failed predictions disproves manmade global warming.

    Yeah…no, it doesn’t.

    And the fact that the United States of America is the ONLY country on earth where anybody even DEBATES this topic anymore ought to hint at something to you.

    But…carry on.

    If you are right, we will have spent a lot of effort making the planet a better place for nothing.

    This isn’t a “hint”. Your “fact” is BS. Please do tell how your efforts make the planet “a better place”! Wow.

    I am not going to argue this.

    You are on the wrong side of science.

    That is it. The discussion is over, as far as I am concerned. I have no interest in debating this. You are wrong. I do not care what you think. Period.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 51 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.