Being the only one in this thread, so far, with actual experience in the doing and teaching of Science, I find that I'm actually kind of impressed that a politician can wax even somewhat eloquently on the merits of Science. Therefore, I conclude detracting opinions--both those implied and actually expressed herein--are stupifingly idiotic. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Mr. G, Good comment. It is certainly good to hear a politician support science with real backing especially when contrasted with the American leader who seems more concerned about supporting already wealthy religions and wars. It almost makes me feel like returning to the UK to live. Cris
1) Quite an assumption, that you're the only user with any "experience in the doing and teaching of science". 2) Up until this point, there had been no detracting opinions in this thread. Thus your remark condemning non-existent detracting statements was stupifyingly idiotic.
Cris, Besides being an amateur astronomer since age 6, I taught Astronomy and space science for 26 years--overlapping periods of: 7 years college professor, 13 years planetarium director, 12 years observatory director; and expedition leader--two total solar eclipses, and Halley's comet from Peru; Nasa lunar sample certification--trying to make use of the chemistry degree. Not Newton, but not unaccompllished. Adam, Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, eh? Your POV, not mine. Shouldn't you at least thank me for introducing you to new terminology?
Hahaha, priceless! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Cooooool avatar, Adam, go, go , go...Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Mr G, there were no actual complaints about Blaire's address prior to your comment about the non-existent complaints. If you'd care to, please show that there were. Actually, the terminology you used was "stupifingly". Marvellous language, English.
Adumb, I would rephrase that as "no pertinent complaints". The fact that you and Banshee stated nothing in support of his address is evidence enough of dissenting bias worthy of reasoned ridicule. If you're so smart, why didn't you know that the actual spelling of the term is "stupefyingly"? You obviously don't care for details.
Mr. G, Thanks. Interesting. Adam, An interesting article, thanks. Did you plan to draw any conclusion from it? Cris
So, since nobody said anything either good or bad about Blaire specifically, that's reason enough to assume we hate him? Man, that's great.
22 times I count my glorious leader using the word science in this article. Is that a bee in his bonnet or what? Makes for irritating reading for me. IMHO looking for all our answers and future achievements in science is a little bit one-dimensional. It sets the non-scientists on a level below the scientists and means that for an opinion to really gain public acceptance it must first be proved by the whitecoats. And anything they don't prove is therefore not true. Bit like 'You're either with us or against us' isn't it?
dick,. Science represents the leading edge in knowledge acquisition. What else is there? I see it more like different functions. If science finds new ideas then technologists can implement the ideas, and the rest are users of the results. There is no question that one group is better than another. Artists may not be able to comprehend much of science but they can appreciate the results. And scientists may make poor artists but they can also appreciate the work of artists. All of humanity can be complementary. No that it is not correct. What they don’t prove is simply unproven, and perhaps unprovable. That is different from saying that something is not true since that would also need a proof. Science doesn’t claim that everything is understood, in fact they realize there is far more they don’t know than they know. It is perfectly acceptable to state that we just don’t know something. So I hope I have shown that it isn’t like that at all. Cheers Cris
banshee, So Banshee what did you mean by this remark. I didn't understand it. But you realize that it did cause Mr.G to overreact and that in turn caused Adam to overreact. It is interesting how a vague and imprecise statement can cause so much controversy. Cris
I meant in principle totally nothing with it. Every time when I give a comment on something, doesn't matter what, it is taken out of contest anyway. If you want my opininon on the article. Well, I couldn't care less about what PM Blair is planning or saying. It is just another politician. And I don't have much with politicians in general. Doesn't matter where they come from. Europe, US, Australia or whatever. G overreact? Poor G. I am sooooo sorry G. I will go on my knees and pray for forgiveness as we speak...
Banshe, You sound as if you feel a little bit persecuted. And I note your 'respectful' sarcasm to Mr G at the end of your post. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! There seems to be an issue between you/Adam and Mr.G that is not connected to this thread. Can anyone enlighten me please, since the bad feelings are being aired in public. Cris
