Frustrated by Facts, Right-Wing Turns to Fiction Author For Policy Advice
Frustrated by Facts, Right-Wing Turns to Fiction Author For Policy Advice
Tomorrow, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, led by anti-environment champion James Inhofe (R-OK), will hold a hearing to “discuss the role of science in environmental policy making.”
It’s an important topic, given the tendency in Washington to choose ideology over facts. Unfortunately, Inhofe’s witness list wasn’t available on the committee’s website, so we called today to find out who would be speaking.
We received the following list. As you’ll see, the featured witness isn’t a noted environmental scientist, or an expert in regulatory policy. It’s Jurassic Park author Michael Crichton.
And why would Inhofe invite a fiction author to testify on the role of science in environmental policy making? We think you’ll understand after reading a synopsis of Crichton’s latest book, State of Fear, about a scientist named Nicholas Drake:
Drake is frustrated by the public’s lack of fear about global warming and, hence, lack of enthusiasm for funding NERF [the environmental group Drake runs]. To remedy the situation, he plans a high-profile conference on “abrupt climate change,” a phenomenon that is essentially fabricated. To make sure folks are good and scared about the imaginary threat, he contracts with the Environmental Liberation Front (ELF) — …a sophisticated, highly coordinated, techno-savvy worldwide terrorist network of dreadlocked hippies — to create a series of floods, hurricanes, and tsunamis that will devastate the world on the eve of the conference.
The bad news: the book’s science is apparently even worse than its plot.
UPDATE: In the comments, Brookings.edu editor Fred Dews points out that Brookings environment scholar David Sandalow, another speaker at tomorrow’s hearings, also has a column picking apart the bad science in Crichton’s book.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
I’ll wait for the movie to come out so I can avoid going to it as well.
September 27th, 2005 at 3:44 pmEverything that comes from the press office is pure fiction, the reichwinger NeoCon David Brooks admitted that last month. Fiction is OFFICIAL policy of this propaganda machine!
September 27th, 2005 at 3:46 pmActually, I think you are just right Ryan.
September 27th, 2005 at 3:48 pmFiction is the official policy of
the Cheney administration.
They did say they they create their own
“reality”, right?
Alternate reality is fiction.
“It’s a unix system!”
September 27th, 2005 at 3:59 pmI guess if Hollywood harlots can testify about global warmning…..
By the way, I hear rocket scientist and diva Barbara Streisand has just declared that according to her latest calculations we are all doomed but there’s just enough time to buy her latest CD.
September 27th, 2005 at 4:00 pmI guess the guy who writes the “Left Behind” series couldn’t make it?
September 27th, 2005 at 4:05 pmThey could have invited Gene Wolfe.
September 27th, 2005 at 4:06 pmOrwell was prescient — more than he knew.
September 27th, 2005 at 4:07 pmWhat about the guy/gal who wrote “The Pet Goat”
September 27th, 2005 at 4:07 pmor whatever the name was.
That would give a good 9/11 tie-in.
In the Jurassic Park books the Dinosaurs are multi- colored. Total joke.
September 27th, 2005 at 4:08 pmBTW, #4., What do you mean by:
September 27th, 2005 at 4:08 pm“It’s a unix system!â€
Imagine, righty, if celebreties never spoke out on politics, Reagan would never have been president. I’m okay with that if you are.
Now on to more pressing issues. What is Bush’s position on dinosaur cloning?
September 27th, 2005 at 4:09 pmI will allow research to procede on those dinosaur lines which have already been cloned, and are running amok on a small island somewhere, beyond our hubristic attempts to control nature.
Now go out and burn more fossil fuels. There’s no consequence!
September 27th, 2005 at 4:10 pmI think FUBAR “the Potemkin President” Bush
September 27th, 2005 at 4:13 pmwould be for dinosaur cloning.
That way they could be killed and made into oil! (joke).
David Sandalow, environment scholar at Brookings, who is on the witness list for the hearing, wrote a piece specifically about Michael Crichton’s book “State of Fear.” It’s available on our website at:
http://www.brookings.edu/ views/ op-ed/ fellows/ sandalow20050128.htm
Fred Dews
September 27th, 2005 at 4:15 pmBrookings Website Editor
“…a sophisticated, highly coordinated, techno-savvy worldwide terrorist network of dreadlocked hippies — ”
The next terrorist threat? I can just see it now: “Today the Netherlands, TOMORROW THE WORLD!”
And the “peace” sign, (two fingers extended from a fist)is the secret sign that members of the “brotherhood” display in public - the devious bastards.
September 27th, 2005 at 4:21 pmHey, I-RIGHT-I, how’s it hanging? (I bet way, WAY to right of your zipper, huh? Heh, heh). Anyway, its me, your old bud, Joe. That shot about the Hollywood harlots you made in #5, that didn’t include Ann Coulter, did it?
Correct me if I’m wrong, but Ann is no harlot. Ann is a writer, or at least she thinks she is, and an anorexic, skinny-assed, antagonistic, sociopathic bitch. At least that’s want some of liberals here would say. I mean, you have to wonder, who do you think the public likes the best: Ann, or nice, pretty, personable Barbara Streisand?
September 27th, 2005 at 4:21 pmThanks Fred.
September 27th, 2005 at 4:25 pmI find climate research interesting.
I also like
http://www.realclimate.org
interesting.
Frustrated by years of electoral losses, the left-wing has resorted to smear and fear campaigns against majority Republicans because they have absolutely no positive ideas for America.
September 27th, 2005 at 4:30 pmGee NeD,
September 27th, 2005 at 4:31 pmThat is a really boring troll.
Brawwwwk…
The NED Limbannity parrot has entered the room
Brawwwk…
September 27th, 2005 at 4:32 pm#11 - That’s a cute little kid line from “Jurassic Park,” the movie.
Hey look, NED is trying to change the subject - again.
September 27th, 2005 at 4:33 pmIs putting Crichton on the speaking list for this event equivalent to inviting Michael Moore to the Democratic convention? Both are fiction writers who think they are qualified to comment on public policy — but who really don’t know enough to be considered an “expert”.
September 27th, 2005 at 4:34 pmNED,
September 27th, 2005 at 4:34 pmBlaming someone for not having a platform is not a platform.
The current counter platform is put the crooks and traitors in jail.
See NeD,
September 27th, 2005 at 4:37 pmCC is doing much better at changing the
subject in a subtle way.
See, he is trying to get into an argument
about MM, but is doing so in a tangential
way to what the post is actually about.
You need more troll school NeD.
#23 Um…no. Michael Moore is not testifying anywhere as far as I know.
September 27th, 2005 at 4:38 pmafter,
not really trying to get into an argument — just pointing out that both sides have their shills
September 27th, 2005 at 4:39 pm#27 going to a convention and testifying at a congressional hearing as a supposed “expert” are very different though, no?
September 27th, 2005 at 4:44 pmOnce again I refer every wingnut that uses Michael Moore as their whipping boy to the DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE that backs up his claims in Fahrenheit 9/11. Until you can debunk his accusations with legitimate sources, you are full of s*it.
http://www.michaelmoore.com/ books-films/ f911reader/ index.php?id=16
September 27th, 2005 at 4:44 pmMulti-colored dinosaurs. Jurassic Park. Hello!
September 27th, 2005 at 4:47 pmCC, it would be equivalent to Michael Moore testifying before the Senate under oath as an expert in oil exploration.
Having him at the convention is like having Zell Miller at the Republican convention, except without the snarling hate speech.
Does that help clear up the comparison for you?
September 27th, 2005 at 4:53 pm“Frustrated by years of electoral losses, the left-wing has resorted to smear and fear campaigns against majority Republicans because they have absolutely no positive ideas for America.
Comment by The Northeast Dilemma”
Bahahahaha,
what’s your big plan, turn Louisiana into HalliBurtonIana?
Bahahahaha
Progressives post great ideas daily, you’re just too stupid to read any of them!
Bahahaha
What pathetic morons these schmucks are!
I love how he states ‘electoral’ losses - while this is true thanks to diebold, they’re technically false from a pure standpoint of democracy. Reichwingers don’t actually believe in democracy though - it’s too commie for them!
September 27th, 2005 at 4:54 pmRyan — That’s a great point about ‘electoral losses’ and not just because of diebold. The fact is that Dems in congress got more overall votes than Repubs in 2004
September 27th, 2005 at 4:57 pmYo NeD: Nice claptrap. You should be on The Majority Report with Janeane Garofalo. Not a progressive? Doesn’t really matter, neither of you say anything of substance.
September 27th, 2005 at 4:58 pm“Is putting Crichton on the speaking list for this event equivalent to inviting Michael Moore to the Democratic convention? ”
Hmm… Lets see. Inviting a speaker is actually NOT equivalent to inviting an audience member - but clarity, metaphor or even reality never seem to collide with CONservativism other than to give it good smack of reality which is always promptly ignored!
“Both are fiction writers who think they are qualified to comment on public policy — but who really don’t know enough to be considered an “expertâ€.”
Actually the supposedly false claims of Michael Moore were largely found to be true. Some of the details of his charges weren’t 100% accurate, but the charges themselves were. For instance he had the dates wrong of when the Bin Ladens were allowed to leave without questioning by a couple of days - but otherwise it was 100% true. And yet the PUBLIC response from the administration has been proven to be false.
Your own David Brooks admitted a couple of weeks ago that the administration is in fact in the BUSINESS of fiction - so clearly a fiction writer is in line with your sense of the world. PURE FICTION!
September 27th, 2005 at 4:59 pmNow C.C., #23, don’t embarrass us guys on the “right” side with that reference to Michael Moore at the Democratic Convention.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t I also see Michael Moore in a prominent location (VIP section) of the Republican National Convention? Sure I did!!!!! I remember it cause I was thinking at the time that Pat Robertson must have been having a total conniption fit, as my mama would say, having been “left” out.
September 27th, 2005 at 5:00 pmThere’s a great article that shows a direct correlation of societies that are religious and the society suffering. Clearly NED wishes all to suffer…
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/092705N.shtml
September 27th, 2005 at 5:04 pmOOps, wrong link, try this one instead.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1798944,00.html
September 27th, 2005 at 5:04 pmNED,
Get up off your knees, and look beyond elections. As you can tell by other people’s reactions to your comments, you are coming across as a complete and utter moron.
You are not helping whatever cause it is that you claim to support.
September 27th, 2005 at 5:05 pmI don’t know, Crichton’s book sounds like a crappy book that will probably become a crappy movie. Why do I picture Keanu Reeves as the lead?
Wasn’t Keanu Reeves available to testify at this hearing? He has acted in some “science” fiction movies hasn’t he?
Maybe he’ll make the next hearing’s line up…
September 27th, 2005 at 5:06 pmhas anyone here read the book? i have not.
September 27th, 2005 at 5:08 pm#19, The Northeast Dilemma — Hey, everybody gets lonely and the temptation is strong to post just to get replies, but could you at least make the attempt of tying your opening statement in the thread to something specific, like perhaps the subject of the story?
I mean, okay, as an opening line to a long screed that eventually gets around to something on-topic, what you typed could have some promise. But seeing it just hanging there alone in the middle of the screen, I have to wonder if the actual typing took place long before the story was even posted, and you just pasted it there like the worker in a fortune cookie factory places bits of pre-printed paper into cookies.
You begin to sound like a tired carnival ride worker, expressing no joy for the effort. It’s like you’re not doing this job for the FUN any more.
September 27th, 2005 at 5:08 pmI will bet that the committee hearing on this is not until 11:00 AM or later. Imhofe, a hard drinker, does not like to get up too early in the mornings.
He usually has a very bad hangover.
September 27th, 2005 at 5:10 pmThere’s a great analysis of the ’stupidness’ of republicanism. There are virtually no republicans at any universities, even in ’science’. Clearly they have no aptitude for any real work or real thinking.
http://www.truthout.org/ cgi-bin/ artman/ exec/ view.cgi/ 38/ 10129/ printer
There’s also a nice example of how republican senators can’t tell the difference between fiction they’ve written and one written by a hack writer.
Earlier this year, the chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, James Inhofe, gave a speech on the Senate floor, which he entitled “An Update on the Science of Climate Change.” In the speech, Inhofe, an Oklahoma Republican, announced that “new evidence” had come to light that “makes a mockery” of the notion that human-induced warming is occurring. The Senator, who has called global warming “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people,” went on to argue that this important new evidence was being suppressed by “alarmists” who view anthropogenic warming as “an article of religious faith.” One of the authorities that Inhofe repeatedly cited in support of his claims was the fiction writer Michael Crichton.
September 27th, 2005 at 5:12 pmjust john,
The rightwing propagandist prefer to distract the threads - it’s part of fascist propaganda 101. It’s up to us to keep it on track - but being free thinking liberals, we often diverge into the 100s of criminal acts perpetrated by the fascist dictator/terrorist who now occupies the whitehouse!
The problem with the republicans is that they’re wrong on EVERYTHING, so fighting them is like punching a giant bowl of poop - all that happens is your hands get dirty and shit flies everywhere!
September 27th, 2005 at 5:15 pmI recommend we all watch “The Day After Tomorrow” for the truth about the environment!
September 27th, 2005 at 5:26 pm#44 — Actually, hijacking threads for one’s own purposes has been done by members of every group of people I’ve seen online since ‘89.
Including me.
But in the current case with NeD, I’m reminded of something PJ once said about how you can tell a movement is winding down by the way the attractive women no longer show up. That’s sexist, I know, but my point won’t be.
My point is that NeD’s increasingly lackluster, mechanical performances on threads here shows that even he’s getting tired of his side, and that’s something worth noting.
September 27th, 2005 at 5:30 pmVery good Ryan, I got a good visual on that one. Maybe it’s time for us to use the shot gun approach on that giant bowl of poop just as one of these right wing nut jobs pass under it. Kind of the old piniata approach from a distance….Blessings
September 27th, 2005 at 5:34 pmjust john,
He’s desperate to hold together is tattered and unraveling delusion. What else can he do but either accept this demise or to daily try to convince himself that he’s ‘winning’. See what reichwingers don’t realize is that while we want to win, and we will always strive to win, it’s more imporatant for us to be right, correct, true and responsible in our actions than it is for us to ‘win’. These schmoes are so focussed on winning, that they don’t even execute the supposed ‘ideals’ they win for. There’s NOTHING republican about the current administration other than perhaps their promise to subjegate and oppress women and gay people. Otherwise they’re just blatant con artists who lie worse to their own party than they do to the americans! Come on - fiscal conservative? Bahahaha - that’s just insanity! There’s not been a fiscally conservative republican since Eisenhower!
September 27th, 2005 at 5:35 pm“There’s NOTHING republican about the current administration other than perhaps their promise to subjegate and oppress women and gay people.”
Gays and women have the exact same rights as anybody else in this country and nobody is trying to take away those rights. The idea that they are being discriminated against is a left-wing misinterpretation of the facts. Can you please explain how conservatives discriminate against women and gays? Or would you rather just take the easy way out and call me a Nazi?
September 27th, 2005 at 5:52 pmCelebrity Death Match between Michael Crichton and Barbara Streisand would be awesome. Its too bad Crichton actually has a background in science. Damn, what hollywood crazy would be a better fit? Help anyone?
September 27th, 2005 at 5:55 pm“Gays and women have the exact same rights as anybody else in this country and nobody is trying to take away those rights. ”
Here’s the conservative frame. It’s a lie and a con game from the start.
“The idea that they are being discriminated against is a left-wing misinterpretation of the facts. Can you please explain how conservatives discriminate against women and gays? Or would you rather just take the easy way out and call me a Nazi?”
I can do both you stupid nazi.
Women:
1) Reproductive rights. Men think they have a right to dictate them to women. This is despite the fact that there’s no universal moral, religious or scientific support to restricting birth control or abortions, other than the ‘opinions’ of a few zealots who have ‘issues’ with their own fear of women.
2) Health. Women’s health issues are often different than men, and they way the respond to medication, and what treatments and techniques required to treat them is often different. Yet medication and procedures are often only tried and tested on men. Women do not tend to have an equal say in society.
3) The ’stay at home’ push. The traditional values coalition are constantly pushing women into the dirt, trying to make them second hand citizens of their husbands. This is reflected in salary, promotion and equal access. This is why there was a push for the ERA, and why women still do not have equal access to the workforce.
I could go on, but that’s enough.
Gays
1) There is no legal protection nationwide for gays (only some states and cities have them). This means gay people can be fired, and evicted purely for being gay.
2) Bush removed the ‘federal employees’ protection on gay federal employees that protected them.
3) Gay people cannot have national legal guardian rights to their partner’s children, whereas hetero couples can.
4) Gay people cannot marry their partners, straight people can.
5) Gay people cannot serve in the military.
I can go on, but that’s sufficient to clearly prove my point.
The fact that you are unaware of your bigotry, does not change the fact that inflict it on society daily! That’s truly the curse of republicanism! Stupid ignorance, coupled with blind arrogance and an asshole desire to make everyone else comply with your own twisted and selfish view of the world. You’re heartless selfish and immoral bastards!
September 27th, 2005 at 6:02 pmRyan,
Come on, surely a nazi like you can try to find some way of weaseling out of your lie! Come on, tell me how those ‘equal rights’ are special because gay people are immoral and don’t deserve to be treated like people. Give me some other bullshit reason that your hate lets you oppress. I’m sure Robert E Lee and Hitler would both be proud of your moral relativism and hatred - you’re a chip off the old block!
September 27th, 2005 at 6:26 pm“Reproductive rights. Men think they have a right to dictate them to women. This is despite the fact that there’s no universal moral, religious or scientific support to restricting birth control or abortions, other than the ‘opinions’ of a few zealots who have ‘issues’ with their own fear of women.”
Of course women have reproductive rights. Condoms, pills, patches…last I heard nobody was trying to ban them. There are people, however, who believe that human life begins at conception, thus abortion is akin to murder. Last I heard, murder is still illegal in this country.
“The ’stay at home’ push. The traditional values coalition are constantly pushing women into the dirt, trying to make them second hand citizens of their husbands. This is reflected in salary, promotion and equal access. This is why there was a push for the ERA, and why women still do not have equal access to the workforce.”
Nobody is trying to force women to ’stay at home’, but the radical feminists are doing their best to demonize those who do make that CHOICE. The reason why women’s salaries are lower than men, and the reason why men tend to be found in higher positions, is because many women CHOOSE to stay at home and be a full-time mom. Do you have a problem with that choice? Is there something wrong with women who make that choice? Of course not.
“Gay people cannot marry their partners, straight people can.”
That is not discriminatory in the least. Gay people have the exact same marriage rights as every other adult in this country. I cannot marry a man, and neither can my gay friends. Gays have EXACTLY the same rights as I do when it comes to getting married. You can argue that you would like to REDEFINE what marriage is, but if so, where do you draw the line? Should polygamy be legalized? How about fathers and daughters? Children and adults? The institute of marriage is not discriminatory, it just has boundries.
Mr. Neat, you have a real talent for being rude and crude. You don’t seem to be capable of civil discussion without the name calling. Now I’m a nazi, a bigot, selfish and an immoral bastard. You, sir, have no class and It is classless people like you that give the leftwing in this country a bad name.
Enjoy your insignificant, classless life.
September 27th, 2005 at 6:32 pmYou can argue that you would like to REDEFINE what marriage is, but if so, where do you draw the line? Should polygamy be legalized? How about fathers and daughters? Children and adults?
Gosh, I guess we really don’t know where to draw the line! Thanks for clearing that up! I mean, sure, children cannot enter into legal contracts anyway and there’s only room for two names on the form, but hey why let that stop you from throwing red herrings?
I would hope you would refrain from making this assertion to the person sitting helpless in the emergency room unable to authorize treatment or negotiate with insurance companies for a monogamous life partner. Saying it on the Internet is okay, though.
And as for those states where gay marriage is legal, I’m sure your dire predictions of polygamy and child marriage will soon be proven for all to see.
September 27th, 2005 at 6:49 pmI am so glad I have the power to change the entire conversation in this blame America first blog. You people are so transparent and insecure, it’s pathetic.
Ryan - you need HELP. Your self hatred is obvious and painful to read anymore. If you want to help elect Democrats, STFU and quit blowing Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan.
September 27th, 2005 at 6:49 pm“I am so glad I have the power to change the entire conversation in this blame America first blog. You people are so transparent and insecure, it’s pathetic.”
We don’t blame america - we blame you. You don’t represent america, or it’s values. Your ‘frame’ is as delusional as your politics are!
“Ryan - you need HELP. Your self hatred is obvious and painful to read anymore. If you want to help elect Democrats, STFU and quit blowing Michael Moore and Cindy Sheehan.”
I don’t hate you, I pity you… Your side hates…
I feel sorry for the crappy childhood that you must have had to think killing is good, and taking away voting rights, food or civil liberties is your duty. You’re a twisted, stupid little fool. I don’t hate people like you, I’m just not willing for you to spread your ignorance like the disease that it clearly is!
“He who does not bellow the truth when he knows the truth makes himself the accomplice of liars and forgers”
Charles Peguy quotes (French Poet, Philosopher and Essayist, 1873-1914)
I know you and your party to be liars and forgers, I’m just doing my civic duty of exposing your psychosis!
September 27th, 2005 at 6:53 pmNED,
Have you read that Leo Strauss book on american fascism? Or does NeoCon fascism just come naturally to you?
How do you feel about PNAC and it’s values? Do you agree with modern FASCISM, or are you just deluding yourself still that you’re the good guy? I bet the latter.
September 27th, 2005 at 6:54 pmHey NED #55, good crack calling everyone here transparent and insecure. I know I am, and I’m a conservative redneck, for Christ’s sake! I hope you don’t think I’m as pathetic as the rest, though. I ain’t got much self hatred. Except when I get too drunk and throw up all those spareribs and BBQ sauce down the front of my shirt.
Correct me if I’m wrong, NED, but I know you are a woman. I mean, none of the guys down at the bar use words like “pathetic” and “transparent” and “painful” or they’d get the crap beat out of em. That’s why I’m asking if you’d like to have a few beers with me and help me STFU and work out some of my hatred.
By the way, you got any idea on how to get BBQ sauce stains out of a flannel shirt?
September 27th, 2005 at 7:01 pm“Of course women have reproductive rights. Condoms, pills, patches…last I heard nobody was trying to ban them.
Then you don’t hear well. Ardent catholics and many on the right wish to ban contraceptions, sex education and any other access women have to protecting themselves. You’re an idiot! In fact the morning after pill which is a CONTRACEPTIVE not an abortion drug is restricted.
“There are people, however, who believe that human life begins at conception, thus abortion is akin to murder. Last I heard, murder is still illegal in this country.”
Well those people shouldn’t have an abortion. Lots of other people KNOW that it isn’t HUMAN LIFE at conception, so we, science and our religion, and our morality clearly disagree with you. You have no basis to inflict your religious dogma on me, when clearly my own religion and science agree with me - not you! No one is forcing you to have an abortion, yet you force people who in good conscience strongly disagree with you into baby factories. THAT’S IMMORAL!
As for your feigned heartbreak on murder. Your party has executed 23 INNOCENT inmates through the death penalty that was posthumously exonerated. Clearly your definition of ‘murder’ is a moral relativism for your own convenience. Or lets not forget all of the MURDERS from an illegal and unjustified war. Clearly your morality is selective and self serving.
“Nobody is trying to force women to ’stay at home’, but the radical feminists are doing their best to demonize those who do make that CHOICE. ”
Oh please! Only a stupid republican would dare post this smearing lie! That’s just crap from Limbaugh and the other women haters clubs you clearly belong to.
“The reason why women’s salaries are lower than men, and the reason why men tend to be found in higher positions, is because many women CHOOSE to stay at home and be a full-time mom. Do you have a problem with that choice? Is there something wrong with women who make that choice? Of course not.”
Bahaha really? Is that why women who stay in the workforce, don’t have children and have the same amount in the workplace as men still make significantly less? Is that why managers say things to women like “Since you have a husband as the breadwinner, you don’t need to be paid as much as a man, right?”
You’re a dope!
“Gay people cannot marry their partners, straight people can.â€
“That is not discriminatory in the least. ”
Oh please, only a bigot would dare claim that! You morons claimed the same thing about interracial marriage.
I noticed you SKIPPED my other points that conclusively proved that gay people ARE discriminated against and jumped straight to this one.
“Gay people have the exact same marriage rights as every other adult in this country. ”
No they don’t, you can marry whatever adult you fall in love with (if you’re in a red state, even the child you fall in love with).
“I cannot marry a man, and neither can my gay friends.”
Nice reframe, that could be restated as I can’t marry someone who’s black, and they can’t marry someone who’s white. We have the exact same rights. This is a bogus and unintellectual argument used by those looking for lame excuse to discriminate.
” Gays have EXACTLY the same rights as I do when it comes to getting married. You can argue that you would like to REDEFINE what marriage is, but if so, where do you draw the line? ”
LIAR! Actually marriage is a CONTRACT that has to do with property arrangements. Gay marriages used to be performed by the catholic church until the 12th century. Many cultures (including european ones) had gay marriages, and at least one emperor of rome married his husband. It is CONSERVATIVES who wish to redefine marriage and be history revisionists.
“Should polygamy be legalized? How about fathers and daughters? Children and adults? The institute of marriage is not discriminatory, it just has boundries.”
Ah, here’s the ‘boundaries’ argument. A good disciplinarian we can all tell. Important to set boundaries. Society doesn’t work without boundaries. You know the next thing is everybody will marry dogs. Well actually you’re a real bitch, so that marriage makes sense. Yeah, Yeah, Yeah. Well all of the things you describe involve a predatory aspect that is not an equal contract. They are entirely different arguments because children cannot make decisions as adults, and therefore it’s nonsense. These kind of illegitimate arguments come from stupid small minds.
“Mr. Neat, you have a real talent for being rude and crude. You don’t seem to be capable of civil discussion without the name calling. Now I’m a nazi, a bigot, selfish and an immoral bastard. You, sir, have no class and It is classless people like you that give the leftwing in this country a bad name.”
Well your party is, and your politics certainly seem that way. The nazi says I have no class - I’ll take that as a compliment considering the source. Clearly being a republican you have no sound judgement, so if I infuriate you then I know I’m doing the right thing!
I travel the world, and frankly the torture, illegal wars, and freaky religious zealots (that would be you) are what give america a bad name. So few of you ever ‘travel’ or ‘talk’ to locals who aren’t corporatists you’d never know that though…
“Enjoy your insignificant, classless life. ”
Well, I have lots of class and beauty in my life - that’s why I can come and argue with reckless fascists like you and still be happy. Clearly your hate has made your life miserable - my willingness to stand of for what’s right has frankly made my life MARVELOUS! That’s why I feel compelled to give that love back to my nation by doing my small part to rid it of the nazi bigoted and stupid pestilence that has rooted here!
September 27th, 2005 at 7:13 pmI grow tired of “fascism” being thrown around. Knock it off. Bush is not a fascist. NeD and Ryan aren’t fascists either, so far as I can tell. Religous extremists, perhaps. Republican hacks. Maybe even ignorant bigots. But fascists? Do any of us really know what a fascism is? Check out what Mussolini’s people wrote:
“For the Fascist, everything is within the State and … neither individuals or groups are outside the State. …For Fascism, the State is an absolute, before which individuals or groups are only relative . . .”
Fascism is all about individuals subsuming to the state. Like an ant colony. As much as I enjoy bashing conservatives, they are more often than not in favor of individualism to a fault. I agree (sadly) that we undermine our message by throwing around words like “fascist.” (George Carlin take note!)
September 27th, 2005 at 7:14 pmI bought his book and read it when it first came out. What a ripoff! He puts so much effort into pushing his agenda that it really distracts from the plot flow (which wasn’t that good to begin with). My pay back - I won’t be buying, or reading, anymore of his books.
If he wanted to argue global warming he should have done it in the peer reviewed scientific literature.
September 27th, 2005 at 7:15 pm“I grow tired of “fascism†being thrown around. Knock it off. Bush is not a fascist. NeD and Ryan aren’t fascists either, so far as I can tell. Religous extremists, perhaps. Republican hacks. Maybe even ignorant bigots. But fascists? Do any of us really know what a fascism is? ”
Yes - do you?
PNAC and the NeoCons are disciples of Leo Strauss and american fascist and German Nazi.
I clearly know who and what they are better than you. Perhaps you should brush up on your understanding before you brush me under the table.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Strauss
http://www.amazon.com/ exec/ obidos/ tg/ detail/ -/ 0312217838/ qid=1127863219/ sr=8-6/ ref=pd_bbs_6/ 104-2152585-7756722?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
The demagoguery of ‘terrorists’ and ‘islam’ are the missing piece of Nazi characteristic that the PNAC hat not clearly demonstrated before 9/11.
“Fascism is all about individuals subsuming to the state.”
And you don’t think this fits this administration? You are a clueless witless idiot if you think otherwise! The very definition of crony capitalism is fascism. It’s using religion, the corporate machine and government to rule the people with an iron fist and create an ‘ordered’ society…
Get a clue!
September 27th, 2005 at 7:23 pmRyan N #62: “Fascism is all about individuals subsuming to the state.†And you don’t think this fits this administration?
No, actually, I think you give them too much credit. It’s all about subsuming the state - weakening it, “starving the beast” - so that it better serves certain corrupt individuals and/or their corporations. I think they call that an “oligarchy.”
Calling them “fascist” makes you sound paranoid. I mean, to be fair, we all have reason to be paranoid, but we lose the middle as soon as that word comes out of our mouths. No?
September 27th, 2005 at 7:30 pmSo this Chriton guy, has he ever published peer-reviewed or what?
September 27th, 2005 at 7:55 pm“No, actually, I think you give them too much credit. It’s all about subsuming the state - weakening it, “starving the beast†- so that it better serves certain corrupt individuals and/or their corporations. I think they call that an “oligarchy.—
No they don’t you dope! An oligarchy has to do with economic price fixing. The use of corporations to dictate state politics is fascism (or sometimes referred to as corporatism - a term defined by musolini).
“Calling them “fascist†makes you sound paranoid. I mean, to be fair, we all have reason to be paranoid, but we lose the middle as soon as that word comes out of our mouths. No? ”
I call them fascists because they are, the truth is the truth. Paranoia comes from not having a rational basis to believe what you believe - that describes republicans!
I simply state the political dynamics as they are.
Did you even follow those links, or are you too sure of your delusion to bother checking?
The term fascism has come to mean any system of government resembling Mussolini’s, that in various combinations:
* exalts the nation and party above the individual, with the state apparatus being supreme.
* stresses loyalty to a single leader, and submission to a single nationalistic culture.
* engages in economic totalitarianism through the creation of a Corporatist State, where the divergent economic and social interests of different races and classes are combined with the interests of the State.
If that doesn’t describe republicans, then nothing does. Like I said before - get a clue! If you’re too balless to call them what they are because someone will call you paranoid, then you’ve already lost!
September 27th, 2005 at 7:59 pm“So this Chriton guy, has he ever published peer-reviewed or what?”
Yeah, his peers think he’s an idiot - just like I do!
September 27th, 2005 at 8:00 pm“I mean, to be fair, we all have reason to be paranoid, but we lose the middle as soon as that word comes out of our mouths. No? ”
Frankly, a “middle” that cannot understand the proper use of words, and is afraid to call facism what it is, is not a middle, it is a cowed and subjagated right! In other words, the Republicans…
Why are we afraid of using the correct verbiage? I wish we had a few decent Dems who wouldn’t pull the punches.
I don’t think that our awareness of the current situation is in any way paranoia.
September 27th, 2005 at 8:12 pmMore like a survival skill.
Pragmatist,
You come across as reasonable and at least you’ve attempted to be fair. Please take a look at this link if you haven’t already seen it. Ignore the source but pay close attention to the content. The similarities are undeniable.
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm
September 27th, 2005 at 8:15 pmI dunno, I think his book is good science. At least the movie was. Of course, that leaves out all the intelligent design stuff about Moses living 900 years, or all the “begats” since Adam and Eve. Still, that part in the movie where the T-Rex ate that guy sitting on the toilet was pretty good. Real scientific stuff about how fast it could run!
Correct me if I’m wrong, but the last time I saw a dinosaur running that fast was Dick Cheney, running for the hospital.
September 27th, 2005 at 8:16 pmEvery rightwinger uses commie to talk about someone who criticizes voter fraud or poverty, even though it isn’t even relevant. The communists don’t believe in any private property - and frankly I don’t know a single liberal that holds this view. The communists believe that no one should ever get wealthy, and I don’t know a single liberal that holds this view. The communists believe that everyone should be guaranteed equal access to all assets, and I don’t know a single liberal that holds this view.
The fact is that america’s left wing is equivalent to the center right of every other civilized nation. The republican right wing values tend to get less than 2% of the vote in europe, compared to elections of nearly half in the US. The reality is that we’ve shifted so far and so consistently to the right, even people that think of themselves as reasonable are clueless to the event!
We are becoming a fascist police state, and losing our freedoms one small cut at a time. Just last week I read how the FBI was asking for an exemption of the court order for searches. In otherwords they want the right to search anyone without just cause! Then there was the proposal this week where bush wants to use the regular army as a police force for america! That’s just way to fascist for any nightmare I might think of having!
Grow some dingles you idiot!
September 27th, 2005 at 8:22 pm[…] Sen. James Inhofe is having a committee hearing to discuss the role of science in policy-making. Humorously, the featured panelist is a novelist. Apparently, real scientists who defend the Republican position on science in policy-making are hard to come by these days. […]
September 27th, 2005 at 8:23 pm“You come across as reasonable and at least you’ve attempted to be fair. ”
In my experience no matter what you say to them, that fairness last 30 seconds until they have to think about something uncomfortable. Then they drop back into checkout and closed minded nonsense!
September 27th, 2005 at 8:24 pmRyan #65, your point is taken. I still think that individualism and profits for the few and be-afraidism for the huddled masses isn’t really “fascism.” But I did not link to those sites and I am instead relying largely on my memory of a class I took in college in 1986, a time of many bong hits. But jeez, is it working for you, using that term?
I’m also surprised you so readily discard the oligarchy charge. From Miriam-Webster:
Main Entry: ol·i·gar·chy
Pronunciation: ‘ä-l&-”gär-kE, ‘O-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -chies
1 : government by the few
2 : a government in which a small group exercises control especially for corrupt and selfish purposes; also : a group exercising such control
3 : an organization under oligarchic control
Look at me! I’m not a dope!
P.S. Isn’t it “ball-less”?
September 27th, 2005 at 8:26 pm“Ryan #65, your point is taken. I still think that individualism and profits for the few and be-afraidism for the huddled masses isn’t really “fascism.†But I did not link to those sites and I am instead relying largely on my memory of a class I took in college in 1986, a time of many bong hits. But jeez, is it working for you, using that term?”
Absolutely it is working!
More and more people daily realize that these guys aren’t just a little bad, but they’re REALLY bad. The ‘contract for america’ and the NeoCon agenda come directly from Strauss. This shit is so right wing and hard to believe, both in its origins and audacity, that you can’t even make up this kind of crap for the movies!
The NeoCons hijacked the already rightwing conservatives and turned them into reichwing fascists!
I suggest you look more closely at who they are,
“I’m also surprised you so readily discard the oligarchy charge. From Miriam-Webster:”
Point taken, I have an economics background, it prejudiced me in the meaning of the word. I stand corrected. But even so, and Oligarchy is more like the familes in Indonesia (although they’re kinda fascist too) than what these guys do. Fascism in fact is a form of oligarchy based on this definition, but it also comes with militarism, a crackdown on dissent, use of lies and propaganda, consolidation of wealth and power into one political and party structure, and every other feature that fit the republicans to a tee!
Please go revisit your understanding fascism - most americans have it COMPLETELY wrong!
September 27th, 2005 at 8:32 pm“P.S. Isn’t it “ball-lessâ€?”
yes, but I type fast, and don’t take the time to spell check sometimes. So I figure as long as you got the meaning, I communicated correctly, and clearly you did! ;)
September 27th, 2005 at 8:32 pm” But jeez, is it working for you, using that term?—
A better way for me to say this is would you have known, or even researched the fact that the NeoCons are NeoNazis if I hadn’t accurately used the term? And the answer is clearly no! The reason I attempt to use a term or a description is that I find it accurate. If corrected on a misconception, or if I make a mistake that is relevant to the topic - I will correct my direction. But so far NOTHING I’ve seen veers me from the conclusion that NeoCons are fascists - and EVERYTHING I see tells me they are. That’s good enough for me, and I’m convinced that if you have an open mind, and do the research - you will reach the same conclusion!
September 27th, 2005 at 8:36 pmI don’t type as fast as you Ryan. Still, I can’t spell good anyway and make a lot of mistakes. Seems like the more beer I drink the more I shlurrr my wurrds.
Or is it wererr my shlurts? Slurg my wurps…..
September 27th, 2005 at 8:47 pmJoe,
Thanks for the suggestion!
I need a guinness is all I can say!
It’s been fun bashing the dopes senseless, but I need a break from the political fun. I smell a good dark pint of beer in my VERY near future…
If you missed the other thread, some of the media folks admitted they go easy on the administration and don’t do their jobs!
http://mediamatters.org/items/200509270003
They need to get off their asses while we still have what’s left of our democracy and our treasury!
September 27th, 2005 at 8:51 pmYeah, its been fun, but I’m outta here for a week. That ought to make NED, mighty aphrodite and CC happy. But I’ll be back to help them clarify their posts before they know it.
September 27th, 2005 at 8:57 pmPragmatist,
There are a number of terms that would accurately describe this government. Kleptocracy, theocracy, aristocracy, et. al….but fascism seems to pull all of them together while including that one key, disgraceful and blatantly un-American characteristic of invading a sovereign nation preemptively based on lies for selfish, imperialistic reasons. The use of the fascism is absolutele accurate. Whether or not you, the Democrats in Congress or anyone else want to believe it. This is simply using the word that best describes the facts on the ground. At some point, pragmatism meets truth and outrage must ensue.
September 27th, 2005 at 8:58 pmMichael Chricton a writer? I never knew.
I suppose it’s a half-step up to “My Pet Goat.”
September 27th, 2005 at 9:05 pmJay,
WELL SAID!!!!
I can’t add anything to that, but thank you!
September 27th, 2005 at 9:07 pmCheers Ryan….enjoy your Guinness. No outrage for the rest of the night :)
September 27th, 2005 at 9:17 pmI used to be a Green Party moderate but with the shifting mainstream apparently I’m now a commie. But words like “imperialism” and “fascism” cause me to cringe and tune out. I guess I know too much history.
Jay, love that 14 pts of fascism. While we’re not fascists yet, don’t worry, I see the dangers clearly.
If you haven’t already, y’all should read Plot Against America by Phillip Roth. Rocks!
September 27th, 2005 at 9:37 pmSo the truth causes you to tune out? Why? If we don’t face it, they win. Since we don’t have an opposition party with courage, the blogs and the lefty web are the only places to find and discuss the truth.
How is what we’re doing in Iraq not imperialism?
September 27th, 2005 at 10:03 pmAnyway, I like the Fascist tag.
Like in the most obvious example, not in any kind of idealogical definition way. And foresaking any literal comparisons (wiil someone say “Oh yeah? When did Bush ever kill a whole bunch of people of one race before- doh!”?).
From what I’ve heard/read/seen on TV of Nazi Germany, it was all about a boy’s club pushing hyper-nationalism, scary-impressive military, wanton excess for a few who are really making policy, control of information to the masses (”All you have to do is convince them they’re being attacked…”), hiding deviance behind a slick, confident, disciplined, public facade (W needs to work this one out still or get obscenely badass uniforms), and squashing dissent (there were a hundred thousand Americans gathered in protest in the capital of this country over the weekend and, geez, think of some of the stuff we see sometimes on TV all… day… long…). All of it with a dash of mysticism, lamely citing something they read/seen in 8th grade Life Science class as some kind of proof (the shape of my cranium shows that I was Intelligently Designed- or something like that; at least I’m blonde/blue). It’s eerie.
Plus the feeling that most of the people that vote for them really don’t realize what they’re all about. Or they just don’t want to be some Commie Democrat.
I shall hereby continue to invoke the tag.
September 27th, 2005 at 11:09 pm“Jay, love that 14 pts of fascism. While we’re not fascists yet, don’t worry, I see the dangers clearly.
If you haven’t already, y’all should read Plot Against America by Phillip Roth. Rocks!
Comment by Pragmatist ”
Which of the 14 don’t apply yet, I’m curious to know? From what I counted, we’re at 14, clearly we are fascist!
1.) Powerful and Continuing Nationalism
Check
2.) Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights
Check
3.) Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause
Check
4.) Supremacy of the Military
Check
5.) Rampant Sexism
Check
6.) Controlled Mass Media
Check
7.) Obsession with National Security
Check
8.) Religion and Government are Intertwined
Check
9.) Corporate Power is Protected
Check
10.) Labor Power is Suppressed
Check
11.) Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts
Check
12.) Obsession with Crime and Punishment
Check
13.) Rampant Cronyism and Corruption
Check
14. Fraudulent Elections
Check
So where do you find the wiggle room? From where I can see, fascism IS republicanism at this point. Perhaps you can educate me on how one of these doesn’t apply?
September 27th, 2005 at 11:22 pmThe right-wingers on the GOP’s giant T-Rex’s big fat lies.
Whatever you do, don’t move. The liberal left, will never be able to tell that we have been lying to the United States citizens. If they can’t see our mouths moving, as we lie, then they won’t know that we’re not telling the truth.
The Republican’s reich-wing political beliefs, are based on movement. So if we don’t make any sudden movements, nobody will be able to tell that, we’re unable to tell the truth.
September 27th, 2005 at 11:25 pmI also was checking out information on oligarchy vs. fascism recently, but I haven’t changed my view — I see us headed pretty much toward fascism. Societies don’t progress down a path in a straight line, exactly as the textbook charts, but in the general direction, and I think Ryan is right — those 14 points are being manifested in America today.
September 27th, 2005 at 11:32 pmWelcome back #88
September 27th, 2005 at 11:35 pmRepublicans compared with Crichton’s strategy of avoiding becoming T-Rex’s midnight snack — pretty apt.
[…] There have been only five people invited to speak before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee by Chairman Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) in their hearing on the role of science in the fashioning of environmental policy. Among these precious five? Jurassic Park author Michael Crichton. The politics of this are clear enough - Crichton just wrote the global-warming-skeptical novel State Of Fear - but surely not even Crichton would posit himself as the national authority? […]
September 27th, 2005 at 11:36 pmCreighton is doing for climate science what he did for nanotechnology in “Prey” : Sensational, moronic plots based on utter pseudo-science. He’s like Tom Clancy — make friends with Republicans, toe the party line, and you get credibility that equals policy experts.
Yick.
September 28th, 2005 at 8:22 amwho do you think the public likes the best: Ann, or nice, pretty, personable Barbara Streisand?
Comment by Joe Sixpack —
You think Babs has a personality? I’d be willing to bet that if you polled Ann’s acquaintances and Bab’s you’d find that most people who know them think Ann is nice and Babs is a stone cold bitch. But I don’t know, I’ve never met either one.
By the way you didn’t happen to catch that film clip of Babs’ blowjob movie that was making the rounds a year or so ago? Funny stuff. Some girls wait tables until the make it big some wait under tables. It doesn’t surprise me at all that Babs was the latter.
September 28th, 2005 at 9:41 amThe point isn’t a CELEBRITY, you Right-wing a**holes; it’s the fact it’s a FICTION-WRITER who will be speaking specifically to address REALITY.
You know, on a slight tangent here, I’m always amused (I used to be disgusted) at RW hypocrisy and feigned outrage. To wit: Yesterday Rush Oxycontin lambasted in his sarcastic way his “fact” that a company hired for NOLA clean-up has ties to the Dem. Gov. He wondered why that wasn’t trumpeted. SIMULTANEOUSLY, he RIDICULED any mention of Halliburton and Cheney’s ties to it. So it’s OKAY to excoriate certain behaviors ONLY if you think Democrats indulge in them, but it’s PROPER to ignore that behavior from Republicans?
Chappaquiddick, meet Laura bush.
September 28th, 2005 at 9:45 amI-RIGHT-U-WRONG,
What does the rightwing have against oral sex? Perhaps if you indulged yourself every so often you wouldn’t be so angry and hateful. Try it and get back to me.
P.S. Don’t do it in front of a camera, it may undermine your political convictions.
September 28th, 2005 at 10:48 amI’m a New Yorker, so I called Hillary to complain about this. She’s my Senator and also on the committee.
Call your senator and everyone on the committee.
http://epw.senate.gov/members/members.htm
Let them know we won’t stand for this crap.
September 28th, 2005 at 10:51 amI-RIGHT-U-WRONG,
What does the rightwing have against oral sex?
comment by B-Jay
If you lefties want buck teeth and STDs of the mouth and throat be my guest but don’t ax to kiss my ass.
September 28th, 2005 at 12:01 pmBuckteeth and STD’s? Where do you get your medical data….Bill Frist?
September 28th, 2005 at 12:16 pmNow we know why MrWrong doesn’t have a girlfriend (or apparently boyfriend) for that matter…
So in conclusion.
We have a republican congressman who would prefer to put a hack writer in as an EXPERT WITNESS on the environment, instead of the SCORES of qualified actual scientists doing peer reviewed work.
Wow, that’s up there with an 8000 year old earth! Why do CONservatives hate america? They surely want us to live in the 16th century delusion of Salem where they burned people who got sick…
Crazy morons! And yes that means YOU TROLLS!
September 28th, 2005 at 1:45 pmIs anyone on this Blog a scientific expert? No. Is Crichton a medical doctor more capable than of any one of us in interpreting scientific data? Yes. Are Barbra Streisand, Ben Affleck, or Martin Sheen scientists? No. You can make it a point of whose celebrity is better than whose, but the reality is, Crichton purely focuses on the importance of taking partisan politics out of science in setting policy. Isn’t that the most important idea here? Absolutely. Democrats and Republicans alike should be able to agree on that.
September 28th, 2005 at 2:39 pmRe #21…
Hey now, MLDB… It’s not fair to compare NED to parrots. I love parrots and am an advocate of their plight. Parrots are extremely intelligent, clever, and resourceful creatures. NED is a dittohead. Dittoheads have about the cognitive and social capabilites of common bacteria. To compare him to a parrot is an insult to parrots and a compliment to dittoheads. Truly unfair, it is. :-)
For more info on parrots…
September 28th, 2005 at 2:47 pmhttp://www.alexfoundation.org/
Perhaps you all didnt read this from the above link about the Crichton:
“CRICHTON, (John) Michael. American. Born in Chicago, Illinois, October 23, 1942. Educated at Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, A.B. (summa cum laude) 1964 (Phi Beta Kappa). Visiting Lecturer in Anthropology at Cambridge University, England, 1965. Henry Russell Shaw Travelling Fellow, 1964-65. Entered Harvard Medical School, M.D. 1969; spent one year as a post-doctoral fellow at the Salk Institute for Biological Sciences, La Jolla, California 1969-1970. Visiting Writer, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1988.”
http://www.crichton-official.com/aboutmc/biography.html
September 28th, 2005 at 2:54 pmTo State of Fear:
Exactly my point. Crichton’s a science professional who happens to write novels. He’s not a novelist who happens to dabble in science.
September 28th, 2005 at 3:02 pmYou want facts….
“STREISAND DECLARES ‘GLOBAL WARMING EMERGENCY’”
http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/ data/ 2005/ 09/ 26/ 20050926_142400_flash4bar.htm
September 28th, 2005 at 3:06 pmBuckteeth and STD’s? Where do you get your medical data….Bill Frist?
Comment by Jay
I assume sucking a d*** is worse for your teeth than sucking your thumb but to be sure we’d need to ax Ryan “gums” Neat. The oral STD thing has been getting some press recently. I guess it only makes sense. Didn’t your mamma tell you not to put that nasty thing in your mouth?
September 28th, 2005 at 3:15 pmMrWrong,
You claimed to be straight - are you saying the only oral sex you know how to do involves you sucking a dick? I thought you were straight - clearly another republican lie! Because if you were straight you’d be giving oral sex to a woman, and unless she’s a freak of nature, you wouldn’t get buck teeth from it. And if you both aren’t promiscuous, you wouldn’t get STDs. But then again, considering you’re a closet case - I’m sure the only way you know how to have sex is promiscuously!
What a closet case homosexual you are - you’re just too sad and pathetic for words!
We have a republican congressman who would prefer to put a hack writer in as an EXPERT WITNESS on the environment, instead of the SCORES of qualified actual scientists doing peer reviewed work.
Wow, that’s up there with an 8000 year old earth! Why do CONservatives hate america? They surely want us to live in the 16th century delusion of Salem where they burned people who got sick…
Crazy morons! And yes that means YOU TROLLS!
September 28th, 2005 at 5:23 pm[…] ELSEWHERE RSS 2005.09.28 Frustrated by facts, right wing turns to fiction author for policy advice [thinkprogress.org] Richard Dawkins tops Prospect’s list of Britain’s top 100 public intellectuals [edge.org] Visions of science [bbc.co.uk] Ivory cower [opinionjournal.com] Canadian Christians discuss science-and-religion [stnews.org] Hollywood’s changing take on the scientist [newscientist.com] 2005.09.27 SpaceNow [spacenow.ca] 2018: moonbase or money-pit [spacenow.ca] Meterologists give storms first and last names [weeklyworldnews.com] Cross-national correlations of quantifiable societal health with popular religiosity and secularism in the prosperous democracies [creighton.edu] Cross-national correlations of quantifiable societal health with popular religiosity and secularism in the prosperous democracies (Figure 5) [creighton.edu] Cross-national correlations of quantifiable societal health with popular religiosity and secularism in the prosperous democracies (Figure 8) [creighton.edu] Pennsylvania’s Flying Spaghetti Monster trials opens today, as godless heathens attempt to refute His noodly appendage [fark.com] Drug secrets [slate.com] New FDA chief: reputation for optimism [cnn.com] Now that’s what I’m talking about! [cosmicvariance.com] A Briefer History of Time (Hardcover) [amazon.com] 2005.09.26 A web of faith, law and science in evolution suit [nytimes.com] Bern honors famous former resident Einstein and his theories [estripes.com] Don’t keep your distance [nature.com] OECD report on the scientific publishing industry [pdf] [oecd.org] The paperless library [economist.com] […]
September 28th, 2005 at 5:32 pmHow did a debate on Crichton and today’s hearing turn into a foul-mouthed display of partisan hate and virtually no worthwhile discussion of the science, etc.? Wow. Sounds like there’s no “progress” to be made at all here.
September 28th, 2005 at 8:56 pmJolly,
It’s because the partisan hacks always come to distract. They don’t want any discussion on the topic, because it doesn’t actually interest them. I’d be happy to discuss the topic at hand - is there something you’re interested in?
There’s a nice link here about the administration witch hunt on climate scientists.
http://www.truthout.org/issues_05/083005EA.shtml
There’s another one here about the ‘fair and balanced’ coverage actually produces an inaccurate bias. This is a common problem with crackpot republican values. When faux news or cnn or another news service simply treats creationism as ‘equal’ to evolution for instance, it creates a bias that there’s actually some basis to what they say - when in fact there is none…
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1978
This is a common problem with how the latest press methodologies are created an entire population of people who have NO IDEA what facts are anymore. They think facts are what 2 sides have to form their opinions, whereas the only real opportunity for a difference of opinion exists in the ABSENCE of facts. When the facts are present, those who ignore them for a partisan agenda are just stupid hacks!
September 29th, 2005 at 12:55 amHere’s a good comparison on the myths vs. facts in State of Fear, http://www.undoit.org/ whatsnew_spotlight.cfm?story=stateoffear
September 29th, 2005 at 3:30 pmIf you want to know what was said at these hearings check this out:
http://epw.senate.gov/ hearing_statements.cfm?id=246814
I haven’t read it all yet, but I am especially fond of Senator Jefford’s remarks.
October 3rd, 2005 at 7:52 pmYou can also watch the hearings here if you have real player:
http://epw.senate.gov/epwmultimedia/epw092805.ram
October 3rd, 2005 at 9:32 pm[…] Best-selling novelist Michael Crichton is a vocal critic of global warming science. His 2004 novel State of Fear depicts an MIT professor who “fights a wellfunded network of eco-terrorists trying to kill thousands by creating spectacular ‘natural’ disasters” meant to trick people into thinking the global warming hoax is real. In January 2005, Crichton spent an hour talking with President Bush; the two were “in near-total agreement,” according to Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes. […]
December 14th, 2006 at 1:30 pm[…] When I read “State of Fear” I was a bit torn over it, but overall “enjoyed” the read. It was a nice fastfood entertainment. Little did I know just how insulting he had been to quite a lot of people it seems. Best-selling novelist Michael Crichton is a vocal critic of global warming science. His 2004 novel State of Fear depicts global warming as a hoax concocted by environmentalists to raise money. In January 2005, Crichton spent an hour talking with President Bush; the two were “in near-total agreement,†according to Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes. […]
December 14th, 2006 at 6:08 pmAt least read what he told them before you go crazy judging him. For all your outrage you should, at the very least, read what the scientist/doctor told them. I thought he made a lot of really good points.
http://epw.senate.gov/ hearing_statements.cfm?id=246766
December 18th, 2006 at 1:30 am