Yes, let's teach the controversy.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

@FXMastermind

You know how to keep a moron in suspense?

Hey, look, guys – it’s working!

[GIGObuster]

@EddyTeddyFreddy

Hey, look, guys – it’s working!

Darn it, **EddyTeddyFreddy **I wanted to keep him in that condition!

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@FXMastermind

You know how to keep a moron in suspense?

One trick pony only knows one song
And one trick pony play it all night long
One trick pony never tries something new
One trick pony is retarded (and yes, it’s you).

[BrainGlutton]

@FXMastermind

You know how to keep a moron in suspense?

Yes. Hang him.

[Trinopus]

That ain’t what I was hoping for from a Suspended Sentence!

[GIGObuster]

@EddyTeddyFreddy

Hey, look, guys – it’s working!

@GIGObuster

Darn it, **EddyTeddyFreddy **I wanted to keep him in that condition!

@Budget_Player_Cadet

One trick pony only knows one song
And one trick pony play it all night long
One trick pony never tries something new
One trick pony is retarded (and yes, it’s you).

@BrainGlutton

Yes. Hang him.

@Trinopus

That ain’t what I was hoping for from a Suspended Sentence!

Amusingly on the other thread that was sent to the pit by a moderator “so the OP can rant in peace”. FX is indeed suspense-fully waiting for me, even though I let all to be known that other moderators recommended me to stay out of there, I continue to comply, but FX is so pathetic that he has to go back to quoting me (from 6 months ago and from a thread from IMHO) and he makes it look like if I’m posting back at that pit thread and like if he had not already replied to that quote. What a self feeding troll quote molester he is; and yes, I will still leave the moron in suspense in that thread.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=17032324&postcount=1509

[watchwolf49]

Did someone bring up whales …

For over 200 years, just about every physicist thought Newton’s Law of Motion were the absolute truth … then one man came along and said they weren’t … but he had proof. I agree with the OP, just neigh-saying some scientific theory isn’t enough, one needs to present an alternative and be able to back that with proof or evidence.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[FXMastermind]

@watchwolf49

I agree with the OP, just neigh-saying some scientific theory isn’t enough, one needs to present an alternative and be able to back that with proof or evidence.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Yes, lets put the cart before the horse. Rather than present a theory, and have the scientific process work, just claim something is happening, (global warming), say it’a fact, and then demand everybody who objects to the wholesale fuck over of the scientific process have to prove global warming is wrong.

Because that’s how climate science works now.

None of this pesky and onerous putting forth a theory and presenting evidence to support it. Instead, just claim “it’s not a theory, it’s a fact”, and turn everything upside down. And if anybody points out that is just fucked up, accuse them of hating science and believing in a flat earth. That’s how you do science now a days.

[FXMastermind]

You know in your heart it is true

[GIGObuster]

@FXMastermind

Yes, lets put the cart before the horse. Rather than present a theory, and have the scientific process work, just claim something is happening, (global warming), say it’a fact, and then demand everybody who objects to the wholesale fuck over of the scientific process have to prove global warming is wrong.

Because that’s how climate science works now.

No, that is how deniers work, with lies and a complete ignorance of history:

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm

In the 19th century, scientists realized that gases in the atmosphere cause a “greenhouse effect” which affects the planet’s temperature. These scientists were interested chiefly in the possibility that a lower level of carbon dioxide gas might explain the ice ages of the distant past. At the turn of the century, Svante Arrhenius calculated that emissions from human industry might someday bring a global warming. Other scientists dismissed his idea as faulty. In 1938, G.S. Callendar argued that the level of carbon dioxide was climbing and raising global temperature, but most scientists found his arguments implausible. It was almost by chance that a few researchers in the 1950s discovered that global warming truly was possible. In the early 1960s, C.D. Keeling measured the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere: it was rising fast. Researchers began to take an interest, struggling to understand how the level of carbon dioxide had changed in the past, and how the level was influenced by chemical and biological forces. They found that the gas plays a crucial role in climate change, so that the rising level could gravely affect our future.

And in reality FX is the one with the false understanding of what science is.

[GIGObuster]

@FXMastermind

You know in your heart it is true

Right Captain Ahab…

“from hell’s heart, I stab at thee” - Moby Dick.

And then down he goes having failed completely to understand what science is.

[Trinopus]

@FXMastermind

Yes, lets put the cart before the horse. Rather than present a theory, and have the scientific process work, just claim something is happening, (global warming), say it’a fact, . . . None of this pesky and onerous putting forth a theory and presenting evidence to support it. Instead, just claim “it’s not a theory, it’s a fact”, and turn everything upside down. . . .

And yet you defend Wegener, who did exactly that. “The continents move. I don’t know how. Maybe it’s Coriolis force.” (Too weak.) “Okay, maybe it’s the gravitational attraction of the Moon.” (Too weak.) “Okay, I don’t know, but it happens.”

You’re demanding one standard for climate science, but defending another for Wegener.

[FXMastermind]

@Trinopus

You’re demanding one standard for climate science, but defending another for Wegener.

There it is! Yet again. State a claim, act as if it is fact, then demand that somebody else prove you wrong.

It’s pseudoscience on display!

[GIGObuster]

@FXMastermind

There it is! Yet again. State a claim, act as if it is fact, then demand that somebody else prove you wrong.

It’s pseudoscience on display!

James Inhofe is that you?

As pointed out, you can huff and puff all you want, but people in education know who is peddling the anti-science.

Home | National Center for Science Education

Although scientists are in broad agreement about the occurrence, causes, and consequences of climate change, the topic is socially controversial. In part, the controversy is due to climate change deniers — people and organizations who deny or doubt the scientific consensus around climate change. In order to derail, delay, or degrade climate-related public policies they oppose, climate change deniers frequently seek to obscure or disparage the scientific consensus around climate change.

In order to develop effective solutions to the myriad challenges of climate change, particularly with respect to climate education, it is important to understand the arguments of the climate change deniers, which consistently employ three rhetorically effective — but false — pillars: that climate change is bad science, that acceptance of climate change is driven by radical ideological motivations and leads to undesirable social consequences, and that it is only fair to acknowledge a scientific controversy over climate change.

Climate change denial is already threatening the integrity of science education in public schools and elsewhere. These attacks occur in individual classrooms, local school boards, state boards of education and state legislatures, and informal learning environments.

[Trinopus]

@FXMastermind

There it is! Yet again. State a claim, act as if it is fact, then demand that somebody else prove you wrong.

It’s pseudoscience on display!

Nope: I identified you in the commission of a double-standard.

No science: everyone here can read it clearly. You blundered.

You’re a pseudo-intellect on display.

[FXMastermind]

@Trinopus

And yet you defend Wegener, who did exactly that.

As I said, science and scientists respect and defend Wegener, unlike your claims about him, which are absurd and wrong.

Although Alfred Wegener was not the first to suggest that continents have moved about the Earth, his presentation of carefully compiled evidence for continental drift inspired decades of scientific debate. Wegener’s evidence, in concert with compelling evidence provided by post World War II technology, eventually led to universal acceptance of the theory of Plate Tectonics in the scientific community.

http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/about/edu/dynamicplanet/wegener/ Your pathetic description of his work is insulting, and of course, csomewhat misguided.

@Trinopus

You’re demanding one standard for climate science, but defending another for Wegener.

More nonsense from your opinionated and wrong little mind.

We use Wegener to teach about science, theory, evidence and mechanisms.

Explain to the students that while Wegener’s idea seems obvious it was not accepted during his lifetime because he could not explain why the continental plates moved. It was only as additional evidence was found that scientists built on Wegener’s idea to develop the theory of plate tectonics.

http://scienceweb.asta.edu.au/years-9-10/unit2/lesson-two/yr910-unit2-lesson-two.html

In this regard, the standard demanded of his ideas is actually what I was talking about, in regards to the ill defined and often misunderstood theory of global warming.

As I said,

Some truly revolutionary scientific theories may take years or decades to win general acceptance among scientists. This is certainly true of plate tectonics, one of the most important and far-ranging geological theories of all time; when first proposed, it was ridiculed, but steadily accumulating evidence finally prompted its acceptance, with immense consequences for geology, geophysics, oceanography, and paleontology. And the man who first proposed this theory was a brilliant interdisciplinary scientist, Alfred Wegener.

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/wegener.html

In case you forgot

@Trinopus

The best geology courses explain why Wegener’s “Continental Drift” theory was rejected. This is not a case where the “dissenting voice was wright.” He wasn’t. Wegener’s theory was entirely wrong, and was correctly rejected.

Nope, you are wrong. But not about it all. You were right that they teach about Wegener.

@Trinopus

They are taught. They’re mentioned briefly in Physics classes (okay, not H Pylori) and they get more attention in History of Science classes.

You just missed out on that sixth grade lesson.

[Smeghead]

You weren’t having enough fun in the six threads already going that are all about you, so you had to resurrect this one, too?

[FXMastermind]

nm

[GIGObuster]

@Smeghead

You weren’t having enough fun in the six threads already going that are all about you, so you had to resurrect this one, too?

Captain Ahab lives!

Nah, Ahab’s arm only looks like it is waiving at us. The movements of the big white whale made his arm look like if Ahab body was giving us a farewell.

[marshmallow]

You guys shouldn’t shit on **FX **so much. Show a little appreciation. What would you even post about without him?

@watchwolf49

neigh-saying

@FXMastermind

Yes, lets put the cart before the horse.

@Budget_Player_Cadet

One trick pony only knows one song
And one trick pony play it all night long
One trick pony never tries something new
One trick pony is retarded (and yes, it’s you).

Rein that in. It’s driving me buggy.