Australian Politics Forum - LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?

FriYAY Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 7395	Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake? Reply #30 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:35pm Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 11:47am: Maqqa wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:56am: Climate change? We might as well teach witchcraft They do. Its called "religious studies". Optional. Fail.
Back to top	IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #31 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:36pm

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 6:13am:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:56am:

Climate change?

We might as well teach witchcraft

Did you learn any science @ school? If so what kind? Geological? Biological? Astronomical? All? None? Other?

SOB

Why would Maqqa &/or these LNP LOONS need to learn, when "they already know how to spin it all"?

Back to top

IP Logged

Doctor Jolly

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3808

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #32 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:40pm

FriYAY wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:35pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:56am:

Climate change?

We might as well teach witchcraft

They do. Its called "religious studies".

Optional.

The difference between "religious studies" and "science" as subjects is religion says "this is the way it is, dont question it". Science says "this is what the science community believes by concensus to be the best explanation of something, but we welcome constructive debate and further research* to prove or disprove it".

Climate change fits this perfectly.

Note * - uneducated, politically driven bloggers dont count.

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #33 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:43pm

SCIENCE as taught in Queensland schools is a "social and cultural activity" that generates explanations of natural phenomenon based on "personal experiences", a view rejected by the nation's deans of science as fundamentally misunderstanding the nature of scientific inquiry.
The description is contained in an overarching statement introducing the syllabus for physics, chemistry and biology for Years 11 and 12 entitled: "A view of science and science education."

"Science is a social and cultural activity through which explanations of natural phenomena are generated," it says.

"Explanations of natural phenomena may be viewed as mental constructions based on personal experiences and result from a range of activities including observation, experimentation, imagination and discussion.

"Accepted scientific concepts, theories and models may be viewed as shared understandings that the scientific community perceive as viable in light of current available evidence."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/experimentation-on-th...

Looks like Komrade Karnal wrote the QLD science and science education curriculum. No right-winger would come up with such bollocks on stilts.
SO mebbe the QLD science curriculum is way too biased towards the looney left.

Back to top

IP Logged

FriYAY

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7395

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #34 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:44pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:40pm:

FriYAY wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:35pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:56am:

Climate change?

We might as well teach witchcraft

They do. Its called "religious studies".

Optional.

The difference between "religious studies" and "science" as subjects is religion says "this is the way it is, dont question it". Science says "this is what the science community believes by concensus to be the best explanation of something, but we welcome constructive debate and further research* to prove or disprove it".

Climate change fits this perfectly.

Note * - uneducated, politically driven bloggers dont count.

So?

The difference is you don’t have to learn religion if you don’t want to. The point I made stands.

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #35 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:45pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:40pm:

FriYAY wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:35pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:56am:

Climate change?

We might as well teach witchcraft

They do. Its called "religious studies".

Optional.

The difference between "religious studies" and "science" as subjects is religion says "this is the way it is, dont question it". Science says "this is what the science community believes by concensus to be the best explanation of something, but we welcome constructive debate and further research* to prove or disprove it".

Climate change fits this perfectly.

Note * - uneducated, politically driven bloggers dont count.

That is not science at all. That is social studies.

Science says (real science), the empirical evidence tells us we are not wrong or right, for now.

Back to top

IP Logged

Doctor Jolly

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3808

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #36 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:50pm

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:45pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:40pm:

FriYAY wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:35pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:56am:

Climate change?

We might as well teach witchcraft

They do. Its called "religious studies".

Optional.

The difference between "religious studies" and "science" as subjects is religion says "this is the way it is, dont question it". Science says "this is what the science community believes by concensus to be the best explanation of something, but we welcome constructive debate and further research* to prove or disprove it".

Climate change fits this perfectly.

Note * - uneducated, politically driven bloggers dont count.

That is not science at all. That is social studies.

Science says (real science), the empirical evidence tells us we are not wrong or right, for now.

Stop talking our your arse. Science says no such thing.

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #37 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:52pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:50pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:45pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:40pm:

FriYAY wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:35pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:56am:

Climate change?

We might as well teach witchcraft

They do. Its called "religious studies".

Optional.

The difference between "religious studies" and "science" as subjects is religion says "this is the way it is, dont question it". Science says "this is what the science community believes by concensus to be the best explanation of something, but we welcome constructive debate and further research* to prove or disprove it".

Climate change fits this perfectly.

Note * - uneducated, politically driven bloggers dont count.

That is not science at all. That is social studies.

Science says (real science), the empirical evidence tells us we are not wrong or right, for now.

Stop talking our your arse. Science says no such thing.

Not mann-made catastrophic climate psuedo science. We know this. That is why we need to rid it from our schools.

Back to top

IP Logged

Doctor Jolly

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3808

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #38 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:53pm

FriYAY wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:44pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:40pm:

FriYAY wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:35pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:56am:

Climate change?

We might as well teach witchcraft

They do. Its called "religious studies".

Optional.

The difference between "religious studies" and "science" as subjects is religion says "this is the way it is, dont question it". Science says "this is what the science community believes by concensus to be the best explanation of something, but we welcome constructive debate and further research* to prove or disprove it".

Climate change fits this perfectly.

Note * - uneducated, politically driven bloggers dont count.

So?

The difference is you don’t have to learn religion if you don’t want to. The point I made stands.

Very few school subjects are definitive. Maths, Geography maybe since it is abstract from the real world.
Economics is a type of "science". Much like Climate science it has a lot of models that are learnt because they fit the data. Doesnt mean they are 100% accurate.
History is a classic subject where interpretations are plainly evident.

Religious studies is the only one that says "this is what it is, dont question it". Not for enquiring minds.

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #39 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:58pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:53pm:

FriYAY wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:44pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:40pm:

FriYAY wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:35pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:56am:

Climate change?

We might as well teach witchcraft

They do. Its called "religious studies".

Optional.

The difference between "religious studies" and "science" as subjects is religion says "this is the way it is, dont question it". Science says "this is what the science community believes by concensus to be the best explanation of something, but we welcome constructive debate and further research* to prove or disprove it".

Climate change fits this perfectly.

Note * - uneducated, politically driven bloggers dont count.

So?

The difference is you don’t have to learn religion if you don’t want to. The point I made stands.

Very few school subjects are definitive. Maths, Geography maybe since it is abstract from the real world.
Economics is a type of "science". Much like Climate science it has a lot of models that are learnt because they fit the data. Doesnt mean they are 100% accurate.
History is a classic subject where interpretations are plainly evident.

Religious studies is the only one that says "this is what it is, dont question it". Not for enquiring minds.

That is exactly what mann-made climate pseudo science is. "this is what it is, dont question it". Not for enquiring minds.

The gatekeeping in climate science is well documented and well played out in climategate and others.

Back to top

IP Logged

tonegunman1

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 427

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #40 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 1:15pm

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 11:01am:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 10:36am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 9:09am:

tonegunman1 wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 9:04am:

Science is fixed...our understanding of it is not.
To say that our understanding of science does not require questioning...is just as "looney" as those who say things like people want to burn science at the stake. These attitudes show, if anything, a disrespect and ignorance of science. Science is built around the questioning of what is "known" and disproving and confirming hypotheses. Majority does not rule or rule indefinitely. Science often swaps majority and minority opinions even where those minority opinions have at one time been ridiculed by the majority. If you just want science as it stands to be accepted, because you agree with it, then what you have is religion not science.

It seems a lot of ppl here think you should know everything and if you dont then you are stupid. Luckily scientists dont think that way. Luckily its not mainstream either.

SOB

Science is not done by consensus, it is done via skepticism and empirical data. The catastrophic climate pseudo science is done via gate-keeping, homogenized data, non-empirical data and jump on the weather is climate band wagon.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1342357146/19#19

tonegunman1 wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 9:04am:

Science is fixed...our understanding of it is not.
To say that our understanding of science does not require questioning...is just as "looney" as those who say things like people want to burn science at the stake. These attitudes show, if anything, a disrespect and ignorance of science. Science is built around the questioning of what is "known" and disproving and confirming hypotheses. Majority does not rule or rule indefinitely. Science often swaps majority and minority opinions even where those minority opinions have at one time been ridiculed by the majority. If you just want science as it stands to be accepted, because you agree with it, then what you have is religion not science.

I agree that we teach, what is thought to be the best "known knowledge" at the time AND also teach students to question those "known knowns", thereby proving or disproving those hypotheses!

But, the LNP LOONS are saying, don't teach the best "known known" of our day, which makes it difficult or impossible to test the science behind the theory!

I think this is to stray into generality when the argument, as I understand it, is specific to climate change science.
Certainly climate change is by a long way the best funded but subject to the least rigor.

Back to top

IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #41 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 1:30pm

tonegunman1 wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 1:15pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 11:01am:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 10:36am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 9:09am:

tonegunman1 wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 9:04am:

Science is fixed...our understanding of it is not.
To say that our understanding of science does not require questioning...is just as "looney" as those who say things like people want to burn science at the stake. These attitudes show, if anything, a disrespect and ignorance of science. Science is built around the questioning of what is "known" and disproving and confirming hypotheses. Majority does not rule or rule indefinitely. Science often swaps majority and minority opinions even where those minority opinions have at one time been ridiculed by the majority. If you just want science as it stands to be accepted, because you agree with it, then what you have is religion not science.

It seems a lot of ppl here think you should know everything and if you dont then you are stupid. Luckily scientists dont think that way. Luckily its not mainstream either.

SOB

Science is not done by consensus, it is done via skepticism and empirical data. The catastrophic climate pseudo science is done via gate-keeping, homogenized data, non-empirical data and jump on the weather is climate band wagon.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1342357146/19#19

tonegunman1 wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 9:04am:

Science is fixed...our understanding of it is not.
To say that our understanding of science does not require questioning...is just as "looney" as those who say things like people want to burn science at the stake. These attitudes show, if anything, a disrespect and ignorance of science. Science is built around the questioning of what is "known" and disproving and confirming hypotheses. Majority does not rule or rule indefinitely. Science often swaps majority and minority opinions even where those minority opinions have at one time been ridiculed by the majority. If you just want science as it stands to be accepted, because you agree with it, then what you have is religion not science.

I agree that we teach, what is thought to be the best "known knowledge" at the time AND also teach students to question those "known knowns", thereby proving or disproving those hypotheses!

But, the LNP LOONS are saying, don't teach the best "known known" of our day, which makes it difficult or impossible to test the science behind the theory!

I think this is to stray into generality when the argument, as I understand it, is specific to climate change science.
Certainly climate change is by a long way the best funded but subject to the least rigor.

I would suggest there is much more rigor in Climate Science, than there is in the thinking of these LNP LOONS!

And, if the best current "known knowledge" on Climate Change, turns out to be correct, then we will need to throw everything at the problem and I mean everything!

Perhaps, we could build a wall, to keep out the worst effects?
Made of Looney Politicians?
Yes, I know, only (half) joking?

Back to top

IP Logged

perceptions_now

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: male

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #42 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 1:35pm

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:58pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:53pm:

FriYAY wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:44pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:40pm:

FriYAY wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:35pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 11:47am:

Maqqa wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:56am:

Climate change?

We might as well teach witchcraft

They do. Its called "religious studies".

Optional.

The difference between "religious studies" and "science" as subjects is religion says "this is the way it is, dont question it". Science says "this is what the science community believes by concensus to be the best explanation of something, but we welcome constructive debate and further research* to prove or disprove it".

Climate change fits this perfectly.

Note * - uneducated, politically driven bloggers dont count.

So?

The difference is you don’t have to learn religion if you don’t want to. The point I made stands.

Very few school subjects are definitive. Maths, Geography maybe since it is abstract from the real world.
Economics is a type of "science". Much like Climate science it has a lot of models that are learnt because they fit the data. Doesnt mean they are 100% accurate.
History is a classic subject where interpretations are plainly evident.

Religious studies is the only one that says "this is what it is, dont question it". Not for enquiring minds.

That is exactly what mann-made climate pseudo science is. "this is what it is, dont question it". Not for enquiring minds.

The gatekeeping in climate science is well documented and well played out in climategate and others.

This is full of more solid -
Credible
Reliable
Abundant
Paradoxes

Fortunately, there is a great deal of solid scientific rigor going into Climate science!

Back to top

IP Logged

Doctor Jolly

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3808

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #43 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 1:37pm

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:58pm:

The gatekeeping in climate science is well documented and well played out in climategate and others.

You could not be further from the truth if you tried.

It may keep you out, but its by the same logic that you are kept out of nuclear science, rocket science, and anything sharp and dangerous.

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: LNP loons want to burn science at the Stake?
Reply #44 - Jul 18^th, 2012 at 2:31pm

Doctor Jolly wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 1:37pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jul 18^th, 2012 at 12:58pm:

The gatekeeping in climate science is well documented and well played out in climategate and others.

You could not be further from the truth if you tried.

It may keep you out, but its by the same logic that you are kept out of nuclear science, rocket science, and anything sharp and dangerous.

If I were a skeptic climate scientist, you would be right on the money.

Back to top

IP Logged