It's like these people don't understand all of the technology they use on a daily basis is rooted in scientific research and discoveries.
They understand just fine.
They're paid to publicly pretend to not understand and muddy the waters.
It's like these people don't understand all of the technology they use on a daily basis is rooted in scientific research and discoveries.
Masters of the Universe with Trump as skeletor
I think he's referring to written history, not some kind of creationist nonsense.I had to double take at the year thing.
Holy mother fuck.
No don't you see, if science doesn't get the answer 100% right on the first try, it's worthless! Life is simple!No shit because science is iterative.
It's like these people don't understand all of the technology they use on a daily basis is rooted in scientific research and discoveries.
It's like these people don't understand all of the technology they use on a daily basis is rooted in scientific research and discoveries.
I'm saying natural scientists aren't as smart as you think are. What you wrote about the invisible hand is bizarre. Knowledge is self-regulating? Knowledge cannot make decisions which it needs to be able to do to self-regulate. Of course, researchers self-regulate. They also create journals which impose rules, have qualifying exams for research programs, etc. as measures to try to ensure quality.
Also, the process of buying and selling in a market is not invisible. The reasons why they do so are not hidden either. The invisible hand is used as analogy to refer to how privately made decisions could lead to a Pareto efficient result.
Im saying people have gotten things wrong throughout the 5,500-year history of our planet
Perhaps you are not as smart as you think you are.
Maybe you should consider that before dumping on the near consensus of atmospheric scientists that anthropocentric climate change is happening. I do research in this field, and I know others. They have spend their entire adult lives studying climatology and atmospheric dynamics, so unless you happen to be an atmospheric scientist as well, I would highly suggest you take the opinion of the overwhelming consensus of experts.
I’m saying people have gotten things wrong throughout the 5,500-year history of our planet
doesn't like roughly half of America believe in Young Earth creationism? I remember seeing that number in a survery a year or two ago, anyway
Idiocracy is coming. Have kids.
This image/meme is being shared on my facebook a lot lately and I do have some questions about it. How is it that in B.C. times, Earth's temperature varied a lot without all of these harmful pollution interferences of today? What exactly made Earth in 8000 B.C. as warm as the Earth today without all of these harmful emissions back then?
Also, what makes temperature readings from sooo far ago scientifically factual? I'm all for a cleaner environment, but it seems like if the effect and cause matched, we would have seen a big spike in the Industrial Age and with coal-powered steam engines on trains.
Most people around the world have pretty shit science knowledge. America fucks up particularly bad WRT religious based questions, but isn't so bad (relatively speaking) on everything else.doesn't like roughly half of America believe in Young Earth creationism? I remember seeing that number in a survery a year or two ago, anyway
LOLNah I skim-read 2 papers and some stuff on a totally-not-biased-blog and that makes me qualified to say that you and everyone in your field are full of shit.
Later, Scaramucci added, Youre saying that you do, and youre saying the scientific community knows, and Im saying people have gotten things wrong throughout the 5,500-year history of our planethuman history, I should say.
I couldn't fit the entire quote in the title, but it is an accurate summary.Misleading title ended abruptly and taken slightly out of context.
Still frightening as hell that they basically offhandedly dismiss science as though we are still in a phase of science from the renaissance era.
I couldn't fit the entire quote in the title, but it is an accurate summary.
How is it taken out of context?
Where is he pulling 5500 from? Homo Sapiens have been around for 200,000 years.
You know that analogy for climate change about a frog in a pot of water slowly being brought up to a boil? Part of the frog's brain was cut out during that presentation.
Climate change deniers are that brainless frog.
Where is he pulling 5500 from? Homo Sapiens have been around for 200,000 years.
No worries. It took me a few passes to parse this idiot's nonsense as well.The title by itself implies he believes the planet is only 5500 years old. Nothing else is inaccurate and the guy is clearly a nut.
Edit: Actually my bad, I guess "our" history clears that up.
Nuclear scientists seem to think that the best way to split the atom is to get very radioactive material and destroy it with a finely tuned shaped explosive. However, my pastor thinks that it is more likely that a very sharp splinter of metal from the bomb is piercing the atom and knocking the nucleus away from the electrons. And honestly, we don't know for sure.
It's like these people don't understand all of the technology they use on a daily basis is rooted in scientific research and discoveries.
Does this have something to do with "God holding together the atoms" or something
Yes, that's well and good. But we're talking about an outright climate denier, who things neither human history or the universe is any older than 5500 years old.
In a longer cut of the video, however, it does appear that Scaramucci said "or I should say human history" to himself as Cuomo was speaking. In a later tweet, Scaramucci said that he accepts 4.5 billion years for the age of the Earth. In a response for clarification on what Scaramucci meant by his 5,500 year comment, he provided us with the following response:
"Was referring to well-recorded human history. Cuomo understood what I was saying but the segment was ending."
Many anthropologists and historians would agree with Scaramucci on this final point. The written historical record is generally thought to begin at around that time with advent of Sumerian cuneiform tablets, which is roughly in line with his assertion that 5,500 years referred to written human history.
It should also be noted, however, that historians have, from time to time, been wrong as well.
Give me a fucking break dude, or did you miss the part where trump won with less votes than romney lost with?