Thursday, March 16, 2017

"Progressive" and "Scientist" are Mutually Exclusive Terms

Quote of the Day:
Accepting the unknown is a big part of what makes a scientist, a scientist. Pretending knowledge where there is none to advance a statist agenda is what makes a progressive, a progressive.
Stephen Green at Instapundit

Addendum, regarding science denialism:
Empirical Science as done by Bacon, Newton, Boyle, Einstein, Feynman, requires falsification capability per Popper. That means that the hypothesis must be testable, and and is re-tested without significant failure, because repeatable failure would falsify the hypothesis.

Anthropogenic Global Warming cannot be tested, cannot be falsified, and cannot qualify as an Empirical science. In fact, it is dependent solely upon the opinions of modellers that they have correctly incorporated all the correct variables in the correct amounts, and that they have used correct temperature data.

But the temperature data being used is extrapolated for vast areas of land (Africa, for example) and ocean (the massive Indian ocean for example). Further the temperature data is "adjusted" before use. The temperature data is also highly suspect due to the use of sensors in the urban heat centers, which are extrapolated to vast areas of open land.

Without unquestionably valid measured data, there is no possibility of a realistic conclusion.

And most siginificantly, CO2 is known NOT to be the primary factor, because water vapor and clouds are. So there is a proposed, unproven, unprovable feedback loop between CO2 and H20 vapor and clouds, and that is claimed to be the theoretical driver.

So we have a) bogus measurements; b) unproven and unprovable hypothetical cause for the questionable measurements; c) non-replicable data and non-falsifiable theory. This then is "science" by Appeal to Authority, and political diktat.

It is not possible to be a science denier when there is no actual replicable, falsifiable science to deny.

It is possible - as we see every day - to have an unscientific pursuit fully weaponized by the Post Truth Leftists for political purposes and social engineering toward known failures of Socialist, elitist hegemony. That is what Anthropogenic Global Warming actually is.
So your comment is without any value.


Hill said...

Pruitt is denying science. What's your point?

Hill said...

This has nothing to do with Left vs Right. You're denying that CO2 is a greenhouse gas? That's intense yo

Geez said...

What else do you expect from Right-Wing religious nuts? They elected Trump after all...

Geez said...

Also, the fact that the idiot who wrote that blog post think that dropping names support his point of view is laughable to say the least. As if logic and reason were contingent on naming the right people to support your views. When you have no support for your anti-scientific position, I guess it makes sense to take that approach. Shameful promotion of ignorance and conspiracy theory thinking. Mixing politics with science. The level of stupidity is strong with this one.

Hill said...

Ya it's just amazing that people can so ignorant of well-established science, purely because of ideology. #sad

Xellos said...

I see David Brock hired some more "perfectly legitimate commenters".

Here's the tactic for engaging with shills: don't. Do not reply to them, do not give their arguments any thought - they'll twist and derail everything you say. Just ignore and ban. Like a Tinder whore, they'll give up when not paid attention to.

Geez said...

Typical SJW, doesn't want to engage, gets his feeling hurt, prefer to ban people. Poor little snowflake Xellos, are you crying because of mean words written on some topic you barely understand?

Todd Clayton said...

Trump proposed cutting funding to several science organizations. Is there any doubt who's against science anymore? While the rest of the world continues to make strides in science, we will be lining the pockets of the most wealthy and pandering to the ignorant.

Steven Satak said...

@Xellos: you, sir, are correct. I note that one of them (Geez) employs language most often found in comments directed at Leftists. Way to go! Your comment might indicate that you, a conservative, found Stan's blog post to be typical SJW twaddle.

But of course, it is not. And they do not fool me, Xellos, because while they write using the correct words, the way they write them practically shouts who they really are.

Note that in the stunning comment Geez made, he or she simply could not resist adding a barb implying they are so much smarter than you. That's a Leftist tell, pure and simple.

Note too that the entire sum of the comment was one long string of insults and sneering. To wit, stating that (1) Stan's an SJW, (2) has his feelings hurt by comments in this section, (3) prefers banning commenters with opposing viewpoints, (4) Xellos is a snowflake, (5) Xellos is crying over an offense taken here (6) Xellos is not as smart as Geez.

Anyone other than a drive-by Leftist would understand what was revealed by the post.

Namely, that the writer considers him/herself superior to anyone with an opposing viewpoint, because they're just too stupid and ridiculous. Why are they like that? Because they disagree. Rather than bring facts to the table, they sling insults and consider THAT an answer.

In other words, the usual Leftist rejoinder, ie: SHUT UP!

I'd tackle Todd Clayton, but really, let's be honest here, who really thinks that you're going to be able to engage in a reasoned discussion with someone who declares that 'Trump's against science'? As though it were a religious position, and not simply a method of determining facts about the world in which we live - as though there is only ONE way of pursuing it, and only ONE way to interpret the results. I didn't come here to cross butter knives with materialist zealots. I suspect Stan has had a bellyful of it too.

Plus, when you roll your mouse over their nym, most of the time it doesn't link back to anything but a web address comprised of their nym. Typical Leftist shill. Nyeah, nyeah, you can't get me.

So no, X, they don't fool me a bit.

TheWatchTower said...

Exactly, Leftists just rampage without fooling anyone. Where are their arguments? None. Well said Steven.

Lauris said...

Agreed, long time reader here. This is getting absurd but eh, you can always just ignore. Keep up the good work Stan. Keep them coming.

Steven Satak said...

@Lauris: you are also correct, sir.

"The Devil, the prowde spirit, cannot endure to be mocked". Or ignored, it would seem.

@ The Watchtower: thank you for your kind and accurate words.

Derek said...

Steven is so right. He uses the best words. Stan's arguments are always on point and Leftists just cannot stand it. They have no morals, no logic, no reasonable arguments, nothing to defend their views.

Steven Satak said...

@Derek: I wouldn't go so far as to say all that. Stan sometimes misses the mark - he would be the first to admit this - and Leftists DO have morals and a defense of their views.

It's just that their morals change from one day to the next, most are entirely subjective, and because the Leftist 'said so'. They don't seem to think anything is bad except when it inconveniences them. They maintain one set of standards for themselves and another for everyone else.... which is why they don't seem to be able to hold a logical train of thought for long. Their reason consists of any number of logical fallacies and is actually based on emotion.

Their highest good is the feeding of their own egos. The food they like best is the crushing of other egos, other people. And that food has to be crunchy - no Leftist wants to push people around who meekly give in.

The most satisfying meal their ego can have is the one gained by using a government by the people, for the people and of the people to punch those same people right into the ground, kicking and screaming in protest as they are forced, upon pain of losing their job, their property, their freedom or their lives, to obey some horrible decree.

The resistance is the point. That tasty, tasty crunch as you force people whose whole moral fiber opposes abortion, to finance other people's 'right' to kill a kid in the womb, is priceless. There is nothing like the spice of irony when you're feeding your Pride. And this explains the Left's increasingly bizarre demands. It's not that they actually care about things like homosexual 'rights', but their Pride increasingly demands more and more spice.

For example, the outrage I feel as I am forced to conform to, support and even celebrate homosexual deviancy? Why, that is the ESSENCE of the whole thing! It wouldn't be a meal if I were not outraged.

But of course, Pride is never satisfied.

It is hard for me, at least, to remember that the Leftist is one of the people that Christ came to save, but so it is.

And Derek, I have never seen anyone who supports Stan write the things you do. Despite your compliments - or what you thought were compliments - to me and Stan, you write like a Leftist imitating a conservative. You're a caricature. It's painfully obvious. Most actual conservatives don't write things like that. But you wouldn't know that, would you?

And if you are on the up-and-up (I happen to think you're a sockpuppet), you are known as the Embarrassing Supporter.

Steven Satak said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Derek said...

Good job Steven! You catch these silly comments once every, hum, 4 or 5 I would say! It's always funny to test how far it needs to go before you realize it's satire, laughing at your sorry ass for being so fucking dumb