Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: 2MAR$ who wrote (28090)	7/7/2012 3:09:07 PM
From: Lahcim Leinad	Respond to of 69300

Cool, thanks! Just Netflixed it and put it to the top of Instant. My gal is going to LOVE it! Life is good, I may get laid. ;-)

To: 2MAR$ who wrote (28090)	7/7/2012 3:21:08 PM
From: longnshort	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

"dealing with the life of Hypatia of Alexandria (370bc) , the greatest female philosopher & mathematican whos life was brutally ended by Christian mob who murdered her in the streets as the fundamentalist church" lets see christians murder her in 370 BC BEFORE CHRIS.....hmmmmm now did these 'christians' know they were christians ?

To: 2MAR$ who wrote (28090)	7/7/2012 8:56:37 PM
From: Solon	1 Recommendation Respond to of 69300

This is NOT great news. Why are there so few Republican Scientists? Do they eschew evidential thinking? Is Reason anathema to these people? Is this the reason so many of them are trying to replace the Constitution with superstitious tripe from uncivilised primitives of 2 millennia ago to whom genocide was a moral activity?? {CHUCKLE!} Is this why the superstitious people on this thread who attack Evolution and praise such tripe as "Genesis are invariably screeching Republicans who think everybody who is not superstitious must be an (EVIL) Liberal? HMMMM.... -g- So why don't Repubs like Science? And no wonder they never win any Nobel prizes! DUH!! "The majority of scientists in the U.S. fall to one side of the political spectrum: Democrat. That’s not good for science, said science scholar Daniel Sarewitz. In an article that appeared this week in the online journal Slate, Sarewitz expressed concern at political imbalance among scientists. He cited a 2009 Pew Research Center Poll, writing, “Only around 6 percent of U.S. scientists are Republicans; 55 percent are Democrats, 32 percent are independent, and the rest ‘don’t know’ their affiliation.” Chris Mooney on why Americans don’t trust science Sarewitz, while not choosing political sides, argued that the political imbalance among scientists is, itself, having negative consequences on science. Politics equals funding, and access to institutional change. He concluded, “As a first step, leaders of the scientific community should be willing to investigate and discuss the issue. ..In lieu of any real effort to understand and grapple with the politics of science, we can expect calls for more ‘science literacy’ as public confidence begins to wane. But the issue here is legitimacy, not literacy. A democratic society needs Republican scientists.” Science scholar Daniel Sarewitz wrote this in Slate in December 2010, airing his concern over an imbalance in the political affiliation of scientists. His article was prompted by President Obama’s December 2010 appearance on the popular science program Mythbusters." earthsky.org