General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 246
Default Global Warming

"Kent" > wrote in message
...
>I can't believe the naivety of what's being said on television about Global
>Warming. Sorry to post this but I have to.


Are you in the US? I'm always amazed at some of the things I see being said
by some Americans about climate change. There seem to be some very anti
science people in the US.

> Global Warming is the first environmental event that signals the end of
> the world for human and animal life as it is today. Global Warming cannot
> be stopped even though many are hopelessly trying. The climate change will
> alter our environment to the point where animal and human life, as we are
> now genetically composed, won't be possible. There isn't anything that can
> be done to temper that.
> A number of events tied to this that will occur a
>
> a. There will be a change in what infects humans and animals that can't be
> treated.
>
> b. Our water supply will be non drinkable and will decrease in volume.


I heard an American scientist say that Arizona was going to have real
problems with water.
>
> c. Our metabolism won't tolerate increased heat. New illnesses will arise
> we can't temper.
>
> d. The change in what will grow and available to eat will not feed the
> world's population.
>
> This will be massive to the point that the world won't be able to
> surviive.
>
> Fortunately, it won't affect us in our lifetimes.


Who do you include in that 'us'? It's already affecting many Pacific Island
nations already.


  #2 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 102
Default Global Warming

"FarmI" <ask@itshall be given> wrote:
> "Kent" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I can't believe the naivety of what's being said on television about Global
>> Warming. Sorry to post this but I have to.

>
> Are you in the US? I'm always amazed at some of the things I see being said
> by some Americans about climate change. There seem to be some very anti
> science people in the US.


You are correct about many in the U.S. being anti science. Religion and
Science go together like oil and water, they do not mix. Show me a person
who is strongly religious and I will show you a person that does not
believe in global warming.

In the bible after Noah and the great flood, God said he would never
destroy the Earth with water again. So many here do not believe the poles
are shrinking and rising ocean levels will harm the Earth. Also religious
people believe in the end times and God will create a new earth when their
messiah returns (never going to happen).

Science has been at war with religion since the days of Galileo Galilei.
In my book, one cannot reason with religious people. They will find a verse
somewhere in their so called Holy Book that will support the most
ridiculous positions.

I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be anti
science.

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)
  #3 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 662
Default Global Warming

On 12/29/2010 7:36 AM, Dan L wrote:
> "FarmI"<ask@itshall be given> wrote:
>> > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> I can't believe the naivety of what's being said on television about Global
>>> Warming. Sorry to post this but I have to.

>>
>> Are you in the US? I'm always amazed at some of the things I see being said
>> by some Americans about climate change. There seem to be some very anti
>> science people in the US.

>
> You are correct about many in the U.S. being anti science. Religion and
> Science go together like oil and water, they do not mix. Show me a person
> who is strongly religious and I will show you a person that does not
> believe in global warming.
>
> In the bible after Noah and the great flood, God said he would never
> destroy the Earth with water again. So many here do not believe the poles
> are shrinking and rising ocean levels will harm the Earth. Also religious
> people believe in the end times and God will create a new earth when their
> messiah returns (never going to happen).
>
> Science has been at war with religion since the days of Galileo Galilei.
> In my book, one cannot reason with religious people. They will find a verse
> somewhere in their so called Holy Book that will support the most
> ridiculous positions.
>


It's sad really. One of my best friends is a physicist. Unfortunately,
she's also Southern Baptist. She chooses the "the bible says this,
therefore it must be this way..we can't question" line that I can't
abide. So we just don't talk about it. On any subject other than
creation/bible stories she's completely logical. But she loses her mind
when it comes to bible stuff.

--
Happy Holidays!!!
  #4 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,415
Default Global Warming

Dan L wrote:
> "FarmI" <ask@itshall be given> wrote:
>
>> Are you in the US? I'm always amazed at some of the things I see being said
>> by some Americans about climate change. There seem to be some very anti
>> science people in the US.

>
> You are correct about many in the U.S. being anti science. Religion and
> Science go together like oil and water, they do not mix. Show me a person
> who is strongly religious and I will show you a person that does not
> believe in global warming.


Note there are only a couple of religions that oppose science. They
happen to be the two largest religions by population world wide. That
doesn't mean there are no other religions that have no problems with
science.

> Science has been at war with religion since the days of Galileo Galilei.


Your arrow of effect and cause points the wrong direction, and your
generalizer is overloading. Christianty has been at war with science
since the days of Galileo. Islam has the same trend. Buddhism not so
much. Hindu not so much. And so on down the list of countless
religious options.

> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be anti
> science.


As seen previously in Edward Gibbon's "The Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire". It's a gigantic book but an extremely educational one.

Global warming - It will bring more hot food. Peppers and spices like
hot climates. Cooking uses heat.
  #5 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 102
Default Global Warming

Doug Freyburger > wrote:
> Dan L wrote:
>> "FarmI" <ask@itshall be given> wrote:
>>
>>> Are you in the US? I'm always amazed at some of the things I see being said
>>> by some Americans about climate change. There seem to be some very anti
>>> science people in the US.

>>
>> You are correct about many in the U.S. being anti science. Religion and
>> Science go together like oil and water, they do not mix. Show me a person
>> who is strongly religious and I will show you a person that does not
>> believe in global warming.

>
> Note there are only a couple of religions that oppose science. They
> happen to be the two largest religions by population world wide. That
> doesn't mean there are no other religions that have no problems with
> science.


Those other religions that are pro science are so small in number they can
be rounded off to zero! One note: I do not consider Atheism a religion!

>> Science has been at war with religion since the days of Galileo Galilei.

>
> Your arrow of effect and cause points the wrong direction, and your
> generalizer is overloading. Christianty has been at war with science
> since the days of Galileo. Islam has the same trend. Buddhism not so
> much. Hindu not so much. And so on down the list of countless
> religious options.


The arrows are flying in both directions for the minds of people and the
earth.
I hope science wins!

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)


  #6 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,415
Default Global Warming

Dan L wrote:
> Doug Freyburger > wrote:
>> Dan L wrote:
>>> "FarmI" <ask@itshall be given> wrote:

>
>> Note there are only a couple of religions that oppose science. They
>> happen to be the two largest religions by population world wide. That
>> doesn't mean there are no other religions that have no problems with
>> science.

>
> Those other religions that are pro science are so small in number they can
> be rounded off to zero!


Check some religious demographics. I started with the wikipedia article
on the topic then I also checked some other sites through a google
search. They don't agree in the second significant digit but they do in
the first so I'll stick to one significant digit. Christianity and
Islam have 2 billion adherents each and are the only religions with
major anti-science movements, largely because they are the only ones
with the problem of biblical inerrancy. Buddhism and Hindu are roughly
1 billion each. It turns out the expression "Big Three" when discussing
religions is actually "Big Four" and the lists don't agree. All other
faiths combined fill out very roughly another billion. The lists that
include the non-religious go as high as another billion.

Reading the demographics you just claimed that 3/7ths to 1/2 of the
total human population can be rounded off to zero. That's a bit like a
common atheist argument that assumes there's only one religion and then
proceeds to work on proving that religion to be in error.

> One note: I do not consider Atheism a religion!


Thus giving you plenty of wiggle room for dropping anyone else just
because you think they also have the error of biblical inerrancy.
Check. Different lists give different numbers for the non-religious but
that only moves the 3/7ths who do not have religious problems with
science towards a larger fraction.

> I hope science wins!


Agreed. I'm a member of one of those many faiths that have no conflict
with science.

But in the end the way science wins is by watching what actually happens
and then explaining it. Current science only gives current estimated
rate and direction of climite change plus error bars based on past
trends. After a million years of ice ages maybe the planet is now
switching to a warm age, more likely per current science. Or maybe
there's another ice age on the way, less likely per current science.
Either way, humanity has been through worse.
  #7 (permalink)   Report Post  
Senior Member
 
Location: WI
Posts: 1,015
Default

I agree on the science/religion thing. To have absolute faith in one or the other, though, is the problem. Science has it's "gotta be right, because it's science" camp, too. The problem with science with regard to global warming is a lack of correlational evidence to actually prove causality.

People have faith that science proves that second hand smoke is dangerous. There are no unbiased studies that show correlation. Most studies about each come from funded think tanks with the sole prupose of proving the hypothesis. The mere act of doing so is anathema to the scietific process. If Al Gore or any of the other major proponents are paying for it, it can't be taken as scientific fact. Most of what I have read is just that "pay for proof." They may be right. But the fact that what was proven was payed for to be so and to come to the pre-proven conclusion makes it scientifically invalid. I'm still open to research on the subject; but not biased research.

Most research is about learning something, not proving it. I'm still a bit in the air w/regard to global warming; just like I am about whether God spoke through any book/person. An omnipotent being speaking only to the literate class? The people I know that argue against climate change say that this has ocurred through history and has little to nothing to do with human activity. Volcanoes spew many more greenhouse gases than cars, powerplants, etc.

I don't know as I'm a bit agnostic on both fronts. Dear Abbey......

Last edited by Gorio : 30-12-2010 at 12:50 AM
  #8 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 246
Default Global Warming

"Dan L" > wrote in message
> "FarmI" <ask@itshall be given> wrote:
>> "Kent" > wrote in message


>>> I can't believe the naivety of what's being said on television about
>>> Global
>>> Warming. Sorry to post this but I have to.

>>
>> Are you in the US? I'm always amazed at some of the things I see being
>> said
>> by some Americans about climate change. There seem to be some very anti
>> science people in the US.

>
> You are correct about many in the U.S. being anti science. Religion and
> Science go together like oil and water, they do not mix.

Show me a person
> who is strongly religious and I will show you a person that does not
> believe in global warming.


Hmmmm. Must be a USian thing. I could certainly show you a few God
botherers I know who a table thumping full on 'do something' proponents
about climate change. Mind you, they are well educated and articulate bible
bashers so they may be exceptional. However, that aside, anyone living in
Australia would have to live in the city and never buy any fruit vegetables
or listen to the news to be climate change deniers.

> In the bible after Noah and the great flood, God said he would never
> destroy the Earth with water again. So many here do not believe the poles
> are shrinking and rising ocean levels will harm the Earth.


Ha!!! Perhaps such people are geographically challenged or ethnically
insular and think that flooding applies only to them.

No-one in Australia would mention any bible promise about flooding at the
moment and not end up in a loonie bin!

Within just one Australian State an area bigger than Minnesota is under
flood water. And that is in just one of our States. We live in a land as
big as the lower 48 and most of it is as flat as a pancake. We've gone from
10 years of dire droughts to now having flooding on a major and a minor
scale. It's happening at local levels with massive dumps that cause roof
caveins and it's also happening right along major river systems running
through several States (and our States are a hell of a lot bigger than US
ones - we've got 5 States and 2 Territorys where you have 48 States) - whole
towns have had to be evacuated and every night the news is full of yet mroe
reports of another town or cummunity or river system under threat.

Also religious
> people believe in the end times and God will create a new earth when their
> messiah returns (never going to happen).


And no doubt they have their pigs all dressed up in flying suits and lined
up out on the runway ready for takeoff.

> Science has been at war with religion since the days of Galileo Galilei.
> In my book, one cannot reason with religious people. They will find a
> verse
> somewhere in their so called Holy Book that will support the most
> ridiculous positions.
>
> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be anti
> science.


It must be very frustrating to put up with.


  #9 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 662
Default Global Warming

On 12/29/2010 7:08 PM, FarmI wrote:
> "Dan > wrote in message


>> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be anti
>> science.

>
> It must be very frustrating to put up with.
>
>


But please try to remember not all of us. Many of us are happy to use
our brains and figure things out without a 2000 year old book telling is
"the way".

--
Currently Reading: Falling Free by Lois McMaster Bujold
  #10 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 102
Default Global Warming

Doug Freyburger > wrote:
> Dan L wrote:
>> Doug Freyburger > wrote:
>>> Dan L wrote:
>>>> "FarmI" <ask@itshall be given> wrote:

>>
>>> Note there are only a couple of religions that oppose science. They
>>> happen to be the two largest religions by population world wide. That
>>> doesn't mean there are no other religions that have no problems with
>>> science.

>>
>> Those other religions that are pro science are so small in number they can
>> be rounded off to zero!

>
> Check some religious demographics. I started with the wikipedia article
> on the topic then I also checked some other sites through a google
> search. They don't agree in the second significant digit but they do in
> the first so I'll stick to one significant digit. Christianity and
> Islam have 2 billion adherents each and are the only religions with
> major anti-science movements, largely because they are the only ones
> with the problem of biblical inerrancy. Buddhism and Hindu are roughly
> 1 billion each. It turns out the expression "Big Three" when discussing
> religions is actually "Big Four" and the lists don't agree. All other
> faiths combined fill out very roughly another billion. The lists that
> include the non-religious go as high as another billion.
>
> Reading the demographics you just claimed that 3/7ths to 1/2 of the
> total human population can be rounded off to zero. That's a bit like a
> common atheist argument that assumes there's only one religion and then
> proceeds to work on proving that religion to be in error.
>
>> One note: I do not consider Atheism a religion!

>
> Thus giving you plenty of wiggle room for dropping anyone else just
> because you think they also have the error of biblical inerrancy.
> Check. Different lists give different numbers for the non-religious but
> that only moves the 3/7ths who do not have religious problems with
> science towards a larger fraction.
>
>> I hope science wins!

>
> Agreed. I'm a member of one of those many faiths that have no conflict
> with science.


Which faith would that be?
No conflict? Cool, so you agree that humans evolved and not created!

Science usually wins but it takes time. It took three hundred years for
most of the world to accept the Copernican system over the ptolemaic
system. I believe it will take almost as long for the acceptance of
Darwin's Evolutionary theory as a fact as well. Perhaps sooner for Global
Warming as it is upon us already.

Now back to my book on the science of cooking, "CookWise" by Shirley O.
Corriher.

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)


  #11 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 102
Default Global Warming

ravenlynne > wrote:
> On 12/29/2010 7:08 PM, FarmI wrote:
>> "Dan > wrote in message

>
>>> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be anti
>>> science.

>>
>> It must be very frustrating to put up with.
>>
>>

>
> But please try to remember not all of us. Many of us are happy to use our
> brains and figure things out without a 2000 year old book telling is "the way".


It's not all that frustrating, I enjoy the arguing. I reach my high when I
am calm and my opponent starts to scream in my face calling me a blasphemer
while I smile back

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)
  #12 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 102
Default Global Warming

Gorio > wrote:
> Dan L;1565719 Wrote:
>> Doug Freyburger wrote:-
>> Dan L wrote:-
>> "FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote:
>> -
>> Are you in the US? I'm always amazed at some of the things I see being
>> said
>> by some Americans about climate change. There seem to be some very
>> anti
>> science people in the US.-
>>
>> You are correct about many in the U.S. being anti science. Religion
>> and
>> Science go together like oil and water, they do not mix. Show me a
>> person
>> who is strongly religious and I will show you a person that does not
>> believe in global warming. -
>>
>> Note there are only a couple of religions that oppose science. They
>> happen to be the two largest religions by population world wide. That
>> doesn't mean there are no other religions that have no problems with
>> science.-
>>
>> Those other religions that are pro science are so small in number they
>> can
>> be rounded off to zero! One note: I do not consider Atheism a
>> religion!
>> --
>> Science has been at war with religion since the days of Galileo
>> Galilei.-
>>
>> Your arrow of effect and cause points the wrong direction, and your
>> generalizer is overloading. Christianty has been at war with science
>> since the days of Galileo. Islam has the same trend. Buddhism not so
>> much. Hindu not so much. And so on down the list of countless
>> religious options.-
>>
>> The arrows are flying in both directions for the minds of people and
>> the
>> earth.
>> I hope science wins!
>>
>> --
>> Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)

>
> I agree on the science/religion thing. To have absolute faith in one or
> the other, though, is the problem. Science has it's "gotta be right,
> because it's science" camp, too. The problem with science with regard to
> global warming is a lack of correlational evidence to actually prove
> causality.
>
> People have faith that science proves that second hand smoke is
> dangerous. There are no unbiased studies that show correlation. Most
> studies about each come from funded think tanks with the sole prupose of
> proving the hypothesis. The mere act of doing so is anathema to the
> scietific process. If Al Gore or any of the other major proponents are
> paying for it, it can't be taken as scientific fact. Most of what I have
> read is just that "pay for proof." They may be right. But the fact that
> what was proven was payed for to be so and to come to the pre-proven
> conclusion makes it scientifically invalid. I'm still open to research
> on the subject; but not biased research.
>
> Most research is about learning something, not proving it. I'm still a
> bit in the air w/regard to global warming; just like I am about whether
> God spoke through any book/person. An omnipotent being speaking only to
> the literate class? The people I know that argue against climate change
> say that this has ocurred through history and has little to nothing to
> do with human activity. Volcanoes spew many more greenhouse gases than
> cars, powerplants, etc.
>
> I don't know as I'm a bit agnostic on both fronts. Dear Abbey......


Lots of evidence to prove the cause and effect of Global Warming.
Opponents always wants more and more research and will still never accept
the conclusion of scientist or try to even slow it down.

Eaarth: Making a Life on a Tough New Planet [Hardcover]
Bill McKibben (Author)
http://www.amazon.com/Eaarth-Making-...3680776&sr=1-1
--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)
  #13 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 662
Default Global Warming

On 12/29/2010 10:35 PM, Dan L wrote:
> > wrote:
>> On 12/29/2010 7:08 PM, FarmI wrote:
>>> "Dan > wrote in message

>>
>>>> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be anti
>>>> science.
>>>
>>> It must be very frustrating to put up with.
>>>
>>>

>>
>> But please try to remember not all of us. Many of us are happy to use our
>> brains and figure things out without a 2000 year old book telling is "the way".

>
> It's not all that frustrating, I enjoy the arguing. I reach my high when I
> am calm and my opponent starts to scream in my face calling me a blasphemer
> while I smile back
>


Or they express their pity for you for not believing like they do...

--
Currently Reading: Falling Free by Lois McMaster Bujold
  #14 (permalink)   Report Post  
Senior Member
 
Location: WI
Posts: 1,015
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan L View Post
Gorio wrote:
Dan L;1565719 Wrote:
Doug Freyburger
wrote:-
Dan L wrote:-
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote:
-
Are you in the US? I'm always amazed at some of the things I see being
said
by some Americans about climate change. There seem to be some very
anti
science people in the US.-

You are correct about many in the U.S. being anti science. Religion
and
Science go together like oil and water, they do not mix. Show me a
person
who is strongly religious and I will show you a person that does not
believe in global warming. -

Note there are only a couple of religions that oppose science. They
happen to be the two largest religions by population world wide. That
doesn't mean there are no other religions that have no problems with
science.-

Those other religions that are pro science are so small in number they
can
be rounded off to zero! One note: I do not consider Atheism a
religion!
--
Science has been at war with religion since the days of Galileo
Galilei.-

Your arrow of effect and cause points the wrong direction, and your
generalizer is overloading. Christianty has been at war with science
since the days of Galileo. Islam has the same trend. Buddhism not so
much. Hindu not so much. And so on down the list of countless
religious options.-

The arrows are flying in both directions for the minds of people and
the
earth.
I hope science wins!

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)


I agree on the science/religion thing. To have absolute faith in one or
the other, though, is the problem. Science has it's "gotta be right,
because it's science" camp, too. The problem with science with regard to
global warming is a lack of correlational evidence to actually prove
causality.

People have faith that science proves that second hand smoke is
dangerous. There are no unbiased studies that show correlation. Most
studies about each come from funded think tanks with the sole prupose of
proving the hypothesis. The mere act of doing so is anathema to the
scietific process. If Al Gore or any of the other major proponents are
paying for it, it can't be taken as scientific fact. Most of what I have
read is just that "pay for proof." They may be right. But the fact that
what was proven was payed for to be so and to come to the pre-proven
conclusion makes it scientifically invalid. I'm still open to research
on the subject; but not biased research.

Most research is about learning something, not proving it. I'm still a
bit in the air w/regard to global warming; just like I am about whether
God spoke through any book/person. An omnipotent being speaking only to
the literate class? The people I know that argue against climate change
say that this has ocurred through history and has little to nothing to
do with human activity. Volcanoes spew many more greenhouse gases than
cars, powerplants, etc.

I don't know as I'm a bit agnostic on both fronts. Dear Abbey......


Lots of evidence to prove the cause and effect of Global Warming.
Opponents always wants more and more research and will still never accept
the conclusion of scientist or try to even slow it down.

Eaarth: Making a Life on a Tough New Planet [Hardcover]
Bill McKibben (Author)
Amazon.com: Eaarth: Making a Life on a Tough New Planet (9780805090567): Bill McKibben: Books
--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)
A side of me strongly wishes to believe that climate change had more proof to back it up. There is also a mess of proof to back that it isn't the case. Sort of like choosing a religion, really. If you have faith in the science you're reading, then you'll believe.

Just the title of the book suggests a strong bias. That's begging the question. You can name a book something that strongly implies your point, then you go about trying to prove it with the title of the book as proof itself. I haven't read this book, though, and might find it in my University library. I'm willing to read it.

If this book is your "evidence", though, it sure sounds like it preponders the conlusion through the title. I fear science is going the way of media in this country. Whoever has the most money has a big point, despite scientific validity, reliability, et.al.

I'll try to find this (hopefully for free) and give it a rip.

I just try to limit energy and live a little off the grid. Even if climate chnage is up in the air, i just want to live in a nice place.

It's interesting when atheists will laugh at all the stories of the Bible, while at the same time taking pseudo-science as undeniable fact. The correlation between those two is what fascinates me. No room for middle ground, "I'm right, you're wrong" thinking.

Though I don't practice any religion per se, I do adhere to the circular philosophy outlined in the Book of Tao, and several other writings that I see are based on wisdom. These things open my mind. Strict adherence to "research" with a predetermined conclusion dishonors science itself. Hard to pick through the good, bad and bogus in religion and science. Right now I see both science and religion as fighting fire with fire. Both sides lose; and deservedly so.

Last edited by Gorio : 30-12-2010 at 04:19 PM
  #15 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 102
Default Global Warming

ravenlynne > wrote:
> On 12/29/2010 10:35 PM, Dan L wrote:
>> > wrote:
>>> On 12/29/2010 7:08 PM, FarmI wrote:
>>>> "Dan > wrote in message
>>>
>>>>> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be anti
>>>>> science.
>>>>
>>>> It must be very frustrating to put up with.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> But please try to remember not all of us. Many of us are happy to use our
>>> brains and figure things out without a 2000 year old book telling is "the way".

>>
>> It's not all that frustrating, I enjoy the arguing. I reach my high when I
>> am calm and my opponent starts to scream in my face calling me a blasphemer
>> while I smile back
>>

>
> Or they express their pity for you for not believing like they do...


Pity from the religious, nonsense... It is more like disgust, otherwise
they would not yell. Pity is also a two way street. How can one believe in
something that cannot be seen, felt, heard and no physical evidence? The
Bible was written by Man not a God or inspired by a non existent God.

They believe because they want to part of a family that also believes. Born
in the US more likely to be Christian, Born in Middle East more likely to
be Muslim, Born in India more likely to be Hindu... The list goes on. The
desire to belong out weighs reason. Better to believe in fantasy and be
happy than accept reality and be alone... That is why people believe, like
mob mentality.

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)


  #16 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 102
Default Global Warming

Dan L > wrote:

A new year is coming, time to end this thread and focus on cooking.

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)
  #17 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 662
Default Global Warming

On 12/30/2010 10:44 AM, Dan L wrote:
> > wrote:
>> On 12/29/2010 10:35 PM, Dan L wrote:
>>> > wrote:
>>>> On 12/29/2010 7:08 PM, FarmI wrote:
>>>>> "Dan > wrote in message
>>>>
>>>>>> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be anti
>>>>>> science.
>>>>>
>>>>> It must be very frustrating to put up with.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But please try to remember not all of us. Many of us are happy to use our
>>>> brains and figure things out without a 2000 year old book telling is "the way".
>>>
>>> It's not all that frustrating, I enjoy the arguing. I reach my high when I
>>> am calm and my opponent starts to scream in my face calling me a blasphemer
>>> while I smile back
>>>

>>
>> Or they express their pity for you for not believing like they do...

>
> Pity from the religious, nonsense... It is more like disgust, otherwise
> they would not yell. Pity is also a two way street. How can one believe in
> something that cannot be seen, felt, heard and no physical evidence? The
> Bible was written by Man not a God or inspired by a non existent God.



I stated that I didn't believe in heaven or hell and they said "We feel
sorry for you." I feel sorry for them that they have to watch every
thing they do or they face an eternity of burning. I prefer karma, myself.

>
> They believe because they want to part of a family that also believes. Born
> in the US more likely to be Christian, Born in Middle East more likely to
> be Muslim, Born in India more likely to be Hindu... The list goes on. The
> desire to belong out weighs reason. Better to believe in fantasy and be
> happy than accept reality and be alone... That is why people believe, like
> mob mentality.
>


It's a lovely dream, christianity. I wish that I could believe
sometimes. It would be a lot easier, especially in my husband's family.
But I have too many questions that they can't answer. And "faith
means believing without asking why" doesn't cut it for me.

--
Currently Reading: Falling Free by Lois McMaster Bujold
  #18 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 102
Default Global Warming

ravenlynne > wrote:
> On 12/30/2010 10:44 AM, Dan L wrote:
>> > wrote:
>>> On 12/29/2010 10:35 PM, Dan L wrote:
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> On 12/29/2010 7:08 PM, FarmI wrote:
>>>>>> "Dan > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be anti
>>>>>>> science.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It must be very frustrating to put up with.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But please try to remember not all of us. Many of us are happy to use our
>>>>> brains and figure things out without a 2000 year old book telling is "the way".
>>>>
>>>> It's not all that frustrating, I enjoy the arguing. I reach my high when I
>>>> am calm and my opponent starts to scream in my face calling me a blasphemer
>>>> while I smile back
>>>>
>>>
>>> Or they express their pity for you for not believing like they do...

>>
>> Pity from the religious, nonsense... It is more like disgust, otherwise
>> they would not yell. Pity is also a two way street. How can one believe in
>> something that cannot be seen, felt, heard and no physical evidence? The
>> Bible was written by Man not a God or inspired by a non existent God.

>
>
> I stated that I didn't believe in heaven or hell and they said "We feel
> sorry for you." I feel sorry for them that they have to watch every thing
> they do or they face an eternity of burning. I prefer karma, myself.
>
>>
>> They believe because they want to part of a family that also believes. Born
>> in the US more likely to be Christian, Born in Middle East more likely to
>> be Muslim, Born in India more likely to be Hindu... The list goes on. The
>> desire to belong out weighs reason. Better to believe in fantasy and be
>> happy than accept reality and be alone... That is why people believe, like
>> mob mentality.
>>

>
> It's a lovely dream, christianity. I wish that I could believe sometimes.
> It would be a lot easier, especially in my husband's family. But I have
> too many questions that they can't answer. And "faith means believing
> without asking why" doesn't cut it for me.


"Faith" is believing in something in which all the facts are not there.
Science tends to deal with Facts and all theories must be testable.
Religion does not deal with facts and their beliefs are not testable. That
is why one cannot question religion because there are no answers to
them... Only doubt... That is why it is called a faith.

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)
  #19 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,415
Default Global Warming

Dan L wrote:
> Doug Freyburger > wrote:
>> Dan L wrote:

>
>>> I hope science wins!

>>
>> Agreed. I'm a member of one of those many faiths that have no conflict
>> with science.

>
> Which faith would that be?


I'm Asatru. There are maybe 100K of us on the planet. Exremely tiny
and obscure. The word translates to "religion". You can't just call
your religion "religion" unless you're in India and it's pronounced
Hindu or in Japan and it's pronounced Shinto. You can select words
from a dead language that mean religion. Asatru was adopted from
Icelandic/Norse. It's got the double meaning of "belief in the gods
and goddesses" aka religion and "loyalty to the Aesir, Vanir and
allied spirits" aka the specific pantheon. I'm the better man for
following no matter if they really do exist, not that I know what
"exist" means for mythical beings without bodies. And really, being the
better man for it is all that's needed. Religion is good for the action
as long as it is not overdosed. It feels good so overdoses get
tempting.

> No conflict? Cool, so you agree that humans evolved and not created!


Note that there are only two faiths in the world that have the mistake
of biblical inerrancy - Christianity and Islam. All faiths have
creation tales but only those two insist that the events actually
happened. One day Odin and his brothers were on the shoreline and they
built humans from driftwood. It's symbol that the deities exist within
the universe so they don't do the something-from-nothing bit. It's
arguably a far better "intelligent design" scenario than doing a few
word substitutions in a biblical creation story but we like all but two
faiths know our tales are symbolic and poetic not literal.

> Science usually wins but it takes time. It took three hundred years for
> most of the world to accept the Copernican system over the ptolemaic
> system. I believe it will take almost as long for the acceptance of
> Darwin's Evolutionary theory as a fact as well. Perhaps sooner for Global
> Warming as it is upon us already.


Agreeing that humans evolved is a tautology at this point. With the
atomic theory we have photographs of atoms. With evolution we have
genomes and genetic manipulation and observed population shifts across
generations. I don't have the slightest issue believing the objective
story of science complete with its how and at the same time believing
the poetic and subjective story of the driftwood complete with its why.
Science never does address the why. Religion tends to get it wrong when
it addresses the how. It's why there never needed to be a conflict and
why there isn't with so many of the faiths in the world.

The problem with "anthropomorphic irreversable global warming" is it
includes an assertion that is trivial to prove and one that is not, one
that is trivial to dissprove depending on time scale. The degree of
human contribution is not as certain as some state.

> Now back to my book on the science of cooking, "CookWise" by Shirley O.
> Corriher.


And to my home brewing with sorghum. Just in case colony collapse had
continued.
  #20 (permalink)   Report Post  
Senior Member
 
Location: WI
Posts: 1,015
Default

I know a few like this who are very smug because they believe thay are already "saved" and look down their noses at the rest of us. I fear they have a sad surprise coming, but whatta ya do?

I find the religion(s) of the Maya to be most interesting, as science was a great part of the religion. Their math was right on, and their ability to predict celestial goings on dang impressive. Our major religions frown at looking outside the biblical/koranic/Torahnic? box, whereas the Maya encouraged it in their intellectual community. It's a great deal to read what's left of what the kindly Christians destroyed of their genius and ponder just how much better off we may have been with it. In the remaining codices, though, one can see the eclipse table in the Dresden codex. The numbers are very easy to learn; but to decipher how they used them for higher math functions is another thing. When they saw something that caught the eye, they tried to find the core for an explanation. That's human nature and the essence of scientific inquiry. They didn't attribute this or that to Allah or God being upset.

Still, when I say that I don't see enough evidence to conclude that major changes in the climate (present and future) necessarily result from hamun activity, I'm often met with the same fury as a psycho-Christian trying to tell me that my Muslim/Buddhist/Hindi friends and I will burn in hell because we don't see things the same. It smacks of alarmist at times. I prefer to think more pragmatically and try to learn from the research I do come across. Before I'll believe it, I look for an attempt to prove a hypothesis, rather than trying to see of the hypothesis is on enough to be tested again. Climate change research is still at the hypothetical stage, IMHO, but I see it coming on strong and holding more water. Just like a Christian sees the existence of his/her God in every day life. In the end, we see what we wish to see. Maybe I just haven't seen enough research; but what I've seen so far is more political propaganda than anything.

Last edited by Gorio : 30-12-2010 at 09:17 PM


  #21 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,727
Default Global Warming

Gorio wrote:


Climate change research is
> still at the hypothetical stage, IMHO, but I see it coming on strong and
> holding more water.




While I don't believe in it 100%, I can't see any reason for delaying
the cleanup of the environment. In the past 100 years humans have been
playing fast and loose with the planet's ecology.

gloria p
  #22 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 246
Default Global Warming

"ravenlynne" > wrote in message
...
> On 12/29/2010 7:08 PM, FarmI wrote:
>> "Dan > wrote in message

>
>>> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be
>>> anti
>>> science.

>>
>> It must be very frustrating to put up with.
>>
>>

>
> But please try to remember not all of us.


Yup.

Many of us are happy to use
> our brains and figure things out without a 2000 year old book telling is
> "the way".


Yup. If I lived there, I'm sure I would find it frustrating.

In another group I'm being told by somene I trust that religion is a factor
in some USians refusing to believe that humans are animals (as in 'animal,
vegetable, mineral'). I find that really, really amazing.


  #23 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 662
Default Global Warming

On 12/30/2010 9:40 PM, FarmI wrote:
> > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 12/29/2010 7:08 PM, FarmI wrote:
>>> "Dan > wrote in message

>>
>>>> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be
>>>> anti
>>>> science.
>>>
>>> It must be very frustrating to put up with.
>>>
>>>

>>
>> But please try to remember not all of us.

>
> Yup.
>
> Many of us are happy to use
>> our brains and figure things out without a 2000 year old book telling is
>> "the way".

>
> Yup. If I lived there, I'm sure I would find it frustrating.
>
> In another group I'm being told by somene I trust that religion is a factor
> in some USians refusing to believe that humans are animals (as in 'animal,
> vegetable, mineral'). I find that really, really amazing.
>
>


Wow. Just wow. Of course we're animals...we're made of meat!

--
Currently Reading: Falling Free by Lois McMaster Bujold
  #24 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 246
Default Global Warming

"Gorio" > wrote in message


> If this book is your "evidence", though, it sure sounds like it
> preponders the conlusion through the title. I fear science is going the
> way of media in this country. Whoever has the most money has a big
> point, despite scientific validity, reliability, et.al.


Then why don't you try reading science sites about climate change from from
other countrys where the Holy Dollar hasn't had such influence?

There are a lot of them out there.

> I'll try to find this (hopefully for free) and give it a rip.
>
> I just try to limit energy and live a little off the grid. Even if
> climate chnage is up in the air, i just want to live in a nice place.
>
> It's interesting when atheists will laugh at all the storuies of the
> Bible, while at the same time taking pseudo-science as undeniable fact.


So far the only person complaining about pseudo-science here has been you.


  #25 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Global Warming

On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 13:40:22 +1100, "FarmI" <ask@itshall be given>
wrote:

> "ravenlynne" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On 12/29/2010 7:08 PM, FarmI wrote:
> >> "Dan > wrote in message

> >
> >>> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be
> >>> anti
> >>> science.
> >>
> >> It must be very frustrating to put up with.
> >>
> >>

> >
> > But please try to remember not all of us.

>
> Yup.
>
> Many of us are happy to use
> > our brains and figure things out without a 2000 year old book telling is
> > "the way".

>
> Yup. If I lived there, I'm sure I would find it frustrating.
>
> In another group I'm being told by somene I trust that religion is a factor
> in some USians refusing to believe that humans are animals (as in 'animal,
> vegetable, mineral'). I find that really, really amazing.
>

I'd be willing to bet they are also home schooling their children to
protect them from all that science blather they're teaching in public
schools today. As was mentioned earlier, otherwise reasonable and
intelligent people can get really stupid when the bible is involved.
Some people actually believe in the bible as written: they believe
that everything was created in 7 days... no metaphor involved and they
believe humans walked the earth with dinosaurs. There is even a
museum to support the theory.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/24/arts/24crea.html

I prefer to watch Dinotopia. At least the dinosaurs spoke English so
humans didn't have to guess at what they wanted.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.


  #26 (permalink)   Report Post  
Senior Member
 
Location: WI
Posts: 1,015
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gloria.p View Post
Gorio wrote:


Climate change research is
still at the hypothetical stage, IMHO, but I see it coming on strong and
holding more water.




While I don't believe in it 100%, I can't see any reason for delaying
the cleanup of the environment. In the past 100 years humans have been
playing fast and loose with the planet's ecology.

gloria p
I'm with you, there. Not buying it hook line and sinker doesn't demotivate me from trying new things. I was hoping to invest in small wind turbine for my own property.

Like I said, climate change or not, I like to live in a clean place. I don't get city water where I am. I go 30 ft. down. Just drove this well two months ago. You think I'm going to go dumpin' motor oil around?

But, you noticed the second I said I didn't buy into it all the way, people started jumping on the "you're a sinner for not believing as I do" train. Bullies come in the shape of religious and science fanaticism.

I certainly don't reject the hypothesis that human activity can change the climate. It should also be no mystery that there's going to be a lot of pseudo-science when there's money involved.

FarmI, maybe you could hook me up to research that you see as right on. Save me the time of sifting through mountains. I work twelve hour days, go to grad school and have a wife, two kids, a dog,a guinea pig and a gecko. I don't have a slew 'o time.

Seriously, though, I'll read what you link me to, or recommend.

I know psycho-Christians, too. The majority I know are not so, though. It's like judging Muslims by the 9/11 nuts. When we meet people who believe differently than we do, we often resort to "reductio ad absurdem" tactics, instead of actually listening to them.

Maybe if we were to be less defensive of our own beliefs, and listened a little more to others, we could find peaceful resolutions to this growing issue and others.

Barb, you used to teach or are a teacher, right? I also teach in a small, rural public school. Ever notice that there's no middle ground to home schooling. Either the parents do a great job, or it's chips, grape soda and video games all day. There's just no oversight.

"Funny. You need a license to drive a car; but any butt reemin' asshole can have a kid." -Parenthood
  #27 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,415
Default Global Warming

sf wrote:
>
> I'd be willing to bet they are also home schooling their children to
> protect them from all that science blather they're teaching in public
> schools today. As was mentioned earlier, otherwise reasonable and
> intelligent people can get really stupid when the bible is involved.


Some home school for that reason. If they ever want their kids to get a
diploma they end up disappointed as a small amount of science is
required.

Some home school because the circulum has declined significantly over
the years. Teaching to an old ciriculum that includes the basics of
western civilization using new materials on the topics is a strategy
used by good private schools and good home schoolers. It's a lot of
work but I do have some acquaintences who do this.

Some home schoolers do it for what I consider political reasons not
religious reasons. The end result can be anywhere along the quality
spectrum, poorly correlated with whether they happen to agree with my
politics.
  #28 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 662
Default Global Warming

On 12/31/2010 10:51 AM, Doug Freyburger wrote:
> sf wrote:
>>
>> I'd be willing to bet they are also home schooling their children to
>> protect them from all that science blather they're teaching in public
>> schools today. As was mentioned earlier, otherwise reasonable and
>> intelligent people can get really stupid when the bible is involved.

>
> Some home school for that reason. If they ever want their kids to get a
> diploma they end up disappointed as a small amount of science is
> required.
>
> Some home school because the circulum has declined significantly over
> the years. Teaching to an old ciriculum that includes the basics of
> western civilization using new materials on the topics is a strategy
> used by good private schools and good home schoolers. It's a lot of
> work but I do have some acquaintences who do this.
>
> Some home schoolers do it for what I consider political reasons not
> religious reasons. The end result can be anywhere along the quality
> spectrum, poorly correlated with whether they happen to agree with my
> politics.


Most of the homeschooled children I know are well past the public school
educated kids...but their parents are highly educated and are doing it
because of the school systems and not due to religious reasons.

--
Currently Reading: Falling Free by Lois McMaster Bujold
  #29 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,415
Default Global Warming

On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 08:16:21 -0500, ravenlynne
> wrote:

>On 12/29/2010 7:36 AM, Dan L wrote:
>> "FarmI"<ask@itshall be given> wrote:
>>> > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> I can't believe the naivety of what's being said on television about Global
>>>> Warming. Sorry to post this but I have to.
>>>
>>> Are you in the US? I'm always amazed at some of the things I see being said
>>> by some Americans about climate change. There seem to be some very anti
>>> science people in the US.

>>
>> You are correct about many in the U.S. being anti science. Religion and
>> Science go together like oil and water, they do not mix. Show me a person
>> who is strongly religious and I will show you a person that does not
>> believe in global warming.
>>
>> In the bible after Noah and the great flood, God said he would never
>> destroy the Earth with water again. So many here do not believe the poles
>> are shrinking and rising ocean levels will harm the Earth. Also religious
>> people believe in the end times and God will create a new earth when their
>> messiah returns (never going to happen).
>>
>> Science has been at war with religion since the days of Galileo Galilei.
>> In my book, one cannot reason with religious people. They will find a verse
>> somewhere in their so called Holy Book that will support the most
>> ridiculous positions.
>>

>
>It's sad really. One of my best friends is a physicist. Unfortunately,
>she's also Southern Baptist. She chooses the "the bible says this,
>therefore it must be this way..we can't question" line that I can't
>abide. So we just don't talk about it. On any subject other than
>creation/bible stories she's completely logical. But she loses her mind
>when it comes to bible stuff.


You may enjoy this.

http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur
--
Susan N.

"Moral indignation is in most cases two percent moral,
48 percent indignation, and 50 percent envy."
Vittorio De Sica, Italian movie director (1901-1974)
  #30 (permalink)   Report Post  
Senior Member
 
Location: WI
Posts: 1,015
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenlynne[_5_] View Post
On 12/31/2010 10:51 AM, Doug Freyburger wrote:
sf wrote:

I'd be willing to bet they are also home schooling their children to
protect them from all that science blather they're teaching in public
schools today. As was mentioned earlier, otherwise reasonable and
intelligent people can get really stupid when the bible is involved.


Some home school for that reason. If they ever want their kids to get a
diploma they end up disappointed as a small amount of science is
required.

Some home school because the circulum has declined significantly over
the years. Teaching to an old ciriculum that includes the basics of
western civilization using new materials on the topics is a strategy
used by good private schools and good home schoolers. It's a lot of
work but I do have some acquaintences who do this.

Some home schoolers do it for what I consider political reasons not
religious reasons. The end result can be anywhere along the quality
spectrum, poorly correlated with whether they happen to agree with my
politics.


Most of the homeschooled children I know are well past the public school
educated kids...but their parents are highly educated and are doing it
because of the school systems and not due to religious reasons.

--
Currently Reading: Falling Free by Lois McMaster Bujold
Kids in my public shool who were home schooled for a time. Thos kidsa usually excel. I have others who drop out of my public school to be homeschooled by the same dysfucntional mess that enabled the kid to fail with no sweat. those kids turn inmate real quick. No mystery: good parents-good kids, shithead parenrts-shithead kids. Some will break the mold, and, in my district, we work very hard to give the kid who was raised by wolves a chance to pass and even excel.

I know what you're saying, though, as publuc universities have adopted the "you believe in feminsim or you fail" philosophy. I love going to my public U (Winona State U) but can see how a more conservative person might feel very uncomfortable there. This is why the Patrick Henry type schools have sprung up. I'm cool with that.

Climate change is also a "given" at the public U level. Can't even debate it. Sorry, my profs are the ones who trained me to beware of preconclusive research. Someoen have some more for me to read. I like research, and have access to a ton. Teach me where hypothesis evolved into theory.


  #31 (permalink)   Report Post  
Senior Member
 
Location: WI
Posts: 1,015
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenlynne[_5_] View Post
On 12/31/2010 10:51 AM, Doug Freyburger wrote:
sf wrote:

I'd be willing to bet they are also home schooling their children to
protect them from all that science blather they're teaching in public
schools today. As was mentioned earlier, otherwise reasonable and
intelligent people can get really stupid when the bible is involved.


Some home school for that reason. If they ever want their kids to get a
diploma they end up disappointed as a small amount of science is
required.

Some home school because the circulum has declined significantly over
the years. Teaching to an old ciriculum that includes the basics of
western civilization using new materials on the topics is a strategy
used by good private schools and good home schoolers. It's a lot of
work but I do have some acquaintences who do this.

Some home schoolers do it for what I consider political reasons not
religious reasons. The end result can be anywhere along the quality
spectrum, poorly correlated with whether they happen to agree with my
politics.


Most of the homeschooled children I know are well past the public school
educated kids...but their parents are highly educated and are doing it
because of the school systems and not due to religious reasons.

--
Currently Reading: Falling Free by Lois McMaster Bujold
Kids in my public school who were home schooled for a time then entered our school usually excel. I have others who drop out of my public school to be homeschooled by the same dysfunctional mess that enabled the kid to fail with no sweat. Those kids turn inmate real quick. No mystery: good parents-good kids, shithead parents-shithead kids. Some will break the mold, and, in my district, we work very hard to give the kid who was raised by wolves a chance to pass and even excel.

I know what you're saying, though, as public universities have adopted the "you believe in feminsim or you fail" philosophy. I love going to my public U (Winona State U) but can see how a more conservative person might feel very uncomfortable there. This is why the Patrick Henry type schools have sprung up. I'm cool with that.

Climate change is also a "given" at the public U level. Can't even debate it. Sorry, my profs are the ones who trained me to beware of preconclusive research. Someone have some more for me to read? I don't know if I'll have time for that whole book. I like research, and have access to a ton. Teach me where hypothesis evolved into theory. Not being snotty, either. I love to read through this stuff, when it's driven by data, not money.
  #32 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 368
Default Global Warming


"Gorio" > wrote in message
...
>
> 'ravenlynne[_5_ Wrote:
>> ;1566354']On 12/31/2010 10:51 AM, Doug Freyburger wrote:-
>> sf wrote:-
>>
>> I'd be willing to bet they are also home schooling their children to
>> protect them from all that science blather they're teaching in public
>> schools today. As was mentioned earlier, otherwise reasonable and
>> intelligent people can get really stupid when the bible is involved.-
>>
>> Some home school for that reason. If they ever want their kids to get
>> a
>> diploma they end up disappointed as a small amount of science is
>> required.
>>
>> Some home school because the circulum has declined significantly over
>> the years. Teaching to an old ciriculum that includes the basics of
>> western civilization using new materials on the topics is a strategy
>> used by good private schools and good home schoolers. It's a lot of
>> work but I do have some acquaintences who do this.
>>
>> Some home schoolers do it for what I consider political reasons not
>> religious reasons. The end result can be anywhere along the quality
>> spectrum, poorly correlated with whether they happen to agree with my
>> politics.-
>>
>> Most of the homeschooled children I know are well past the public school
>>
>> educated kids...but their parents are highly educated and are doing it
>> because of the school systems and not due to religious reasons.
>>
>> --
>> Currently Reading: Falling Free by Lois McMaster Bujold

>
> Kids in my public shool who were home schooled for a time. Thos kidsa
> usually excel. I have others who drop out of my public school to be
> homeschooled by the same dysfucntional mess that enabled the kid to fail
> with no sweat. those kids turn inmate real quick. No mystery: good
> parents-good kids, shithead parenrts-shithead kids. Some will break the
> mold, and, in my district, we work very hard to give the kid who was
> raised by wolves a chance to pass and even excel.
>
> I know what you're saying, though, as publuc universities have adopted
> the "you believe in feminsim or you fail" philosophy. I love going to my
> public U (Winona State U) but can see how a more conservative person
> might feel very uncomfortable there. This is why the Patrick Henry type
> schools have sprung up. I'm cool with that.
>
> Climate change is also a "given" at the public U level. Can't even
> debate it. Sorry, my profs are the ones who trained me to beware of
> preconclusive research. Someoen have some more for me to read. I like
> research, and have access to a ton. Teach me where hypothesis evolved
> into theory.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Gorio


What years were you at Winona State?? And more importantly, were you in any
classes of mine?? LOL

Jinx


  #33 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19,959
Default Global Warming

On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 15:39:00 +0000, Gorio wrote:

> 'ravenlynne[_5_ Wrote:
>> ;1566354']On 12/31/2010 10:51 AM, Doug Freyburger wrote:-
>> sf wrote:-
>>
>> I'd be willing to bet they are also home schooling their children to
>> protect them from all that science blather they're teaching in public
>> schools today. As was mentioned earlier, otherwise reasonable and
>> intelligent people can get really stupid when the bible is involved.-
>>
>> Some home school for that reason. If they ever want their kids to get
>> a
>> diploma they end up disappointed as a small amount of science is
>> required.
>>
>> Some home school because the circulum has declined significantly over
>> the years. Teaching to an old ciriculum that includes the basics of
>> western civilization using new materials on the topics is a strategy
>> used by good private schools and good home schoolers. It's a lot of
>> work but I do have some acquaintences who do this.
>>
>> Some home schoolers do it for what I consider political reasons not
>> religious reasons. The end result can be anywhere along the quality
>> spectrum, poorly correlated with whether they happen to agree with my
>> politics.-
>>
>> Most of the homeschooled children I know are well past the public school
>>
>> educated kids...but their parents are highly educated and are doing it
>> because of the school systems and not due to religious reasons.
>>
>> --
>> Currently Reading: Falling Free by Lois McMaster Bujold

>
> Kids in my public shool who were home schooled for a time. Thos kidsa
> usually excel. I have others who drop out of my public school to be
> homeschooled by the same dysfucntional mess that enabled the kid to fail
> with no sweat. those kids turn inmate real quick. No mystery: good
> parents-good kids, shithead parenrts-shithead kids. Some will break the
> mold, and, in my district, we work very hard to give the kid who was
> raised by wolves a chance to pass and even excel.
>
> I know what you're saying, though, as publuc universities have adopted
> the "you believe in feminsim or you fail" philosophy. I love going to my
> public U (Winona State U) but can see how a more conservative person
> might feel very uncomfortable there. This is why the Patrick Henry type
> schools have sprung up. I'm cool with that.


this is bullshit. you can argue against feminism all you want *as long as
you make your points logically and grammatically*. and if you think you
get a good education at patrick henry, you're mistaken. you get trained to
be a right-wing culture warrior:

The mission of Patrick Henry College, as adopted by the Board of Trustees
September 28, 2002, is "to train Christian men and women who will lead our
nation and shape our culture with timeless biblical values and fidelity to
the spirit of the American founding. In order to accomplish this mission,
the College provides academically excellent higher education with a
biblical worldview using classical liberal arts core curriculum and
apprenticeship methodology." The College's vision is "to aid in the
transformation of American society by training Christian students to serve
God and mankind with a passion for righteousness, justice and mercy,
through careers of public service and cultural influence."

The College's "Statement of Faith" includes, but is not limited to, the
acknowledgment that "Jesus Christ literally will come to earth again in the
Second Advent" and that "Satan exists as a personal, malevolent being who
acts as tempter and accuser, for whom Hell, the place of eternal
punishment, was prepared, where all who die outside of Christ shall be
confined in conscious torment for eternity."

<http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Patrick_Henry_College>

no thanks. patrick henry grads become republican *apparatchiks*.

blake


  #34 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 974
Default Global Warming

In article >,
dude says...
>
> ravenlynne > wrote:
> > On 12/29/2010 10:35 PM, Dan L wrote:
> >> > wrote:
> >>> On 12/29/2010 7:08 PM, FarmI wrote:
> >>>> "Dan > wrote in message
> >>>
> >>>>> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be anti
> >>>>> science.
> >>>>
> >>>> It must be very frustrating to put up with.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> But please try to remember not all of us. Many of us are happy to use our
> >>> brains and figure things out without a 2000 year old book telling is "the way".
> >>
> >> It's not all that frustrating, I enjoy the arguing. I reach my high when I
> >> am calm and my opponent starts to scream in my face calling me a blasphemer
> >> while I smile back
> >>

> >
> > Or they express their pity for you for not believing like they do...

>
> Pity from the religious, nonsense... It is more like disgust, otherwise
> they would not yell. Pity is also a two way street. How can one believe in
> something that cannot be seen, felt, heard and no physical evidence? The
> Bible was written by Man not a God or inspired by a non existent God.
>
> They believe because they want to part of a family that also believes. Born
> in the US more likely to be Christian, Born in Middle East more likely to
> be Muslim, Born in India more likely to be Hindu... The list goes on. The
> desire to belong out weighs reason. Better to believe in fantasy and be
> happy than accept reality and be alone... That is why people believe, like
> mob mentality.


Faith is not a conscious decision, it's something that one has or does
not have. Many religious adherents do not have faith and there are
people who have faith but don't accept any religion. If you don't have
it then you probably will never understand it, and if you do have it
you'll likely find the antics of the faithless believers amusing.

How one gets it I have no idea--I suspect that it's a matter of early
indoctrination but that's entirely an uninformed opinion.



  #35 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 643
Default Global Warming

"J. Clarke" > wrote:
> In article >,
> dude says...
>>
>> ravenlynne > wrote:
>>> On 12/29/2010 10:35 PM, Dan L wrote:
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> On 12/29/2010 7:08 PM, FarmI wrote:
>>>>>> "Dan > wrote in message
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not amazed, by it at all. It is typical of many Americans to be anti
>>>>>>> science.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It must be very frustrating to put up with.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But please try to remember not all of us. Many of us are happy to use our
>>>>> brains and figure things out without a 2000 year old book telling is "the way".
>>>>
>>>> It's not all that frustrating, I enjoy the arguing. I reach my high when I
>>>> am calm and my opponent starts to scream in my face calling me a blasphemer
>>>> while I smile back
>>>>
>>>
>>> Or they express their pity for you for not believing like they do...

>>
>> Pity from the religious, nonsense... It is more like disgust, otherwise
>> they would not yell. Pity is also a two way street. How can one believe in
>> something that cannot be seen, felt, heard and no physical evidence? The
>> Bible was written by Man not a God or inspired by a non existent God.
>>
>> They believe because they want to part of a family that also believes. Born
>> in the US more likely to be Christian, Born in Middle East more likely to
>> be Muslim, Born in India more likely to be Hindu... The list goes on. The
>> desire to belong out weighs reason. Better to believe in fantasy and be
>> happy than accept reality and be alone... That is why people believe, like
>> mob mentality.

>
> Faith is not a conscious decision, it's something that one has or does
> not have. Many religious adherents do not have faith and there are
> people who have faith but don't accept any religion. If you don't have
> it then you probably will never understand it, and if you do have it
> you'll likely find the antics of the faithless believers amusing.
>
> How one gets it I have no idea--I suspect that it's a matter of early
> indoctrination but that's entirely an uninformed opinion.


Oh God! (Name used in Vain here).
If one believes in a God, are you saying it is embedded in ones genetic
makeup?
Or are you leaning forwards a view of Predestination?
Both or neither?

I reject the assumption that if one does OR does not have FAITH that one
cannot understand the other.

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)


  #37 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 643
Default Global Warming

sf > wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 01:31:59 +0000 (UTC), Nad R
> > wrote:
>
>> "J. Clarke" > wrote:
>>> In article >,
>>> dude says...
>>>>
>>>> ravenlynne > wrote:
>>>
>>> Faith is not a conscious decision, it's something that one has or does
>>> not have. Many religious adherents do not have faith and there are
>>> people who have faith but don't accept any religion. If you don't have
>>> it then you probably will never understand it, and if you do have it
>>> you'll likely find the antics of the faithless believers amusing.
>>>
>>> How one gets it I have no idea--I suspect that it's a matter of early
>>> indoctrination but that's entirely an uninformed opinion.

>>
>> Oh God! (Name used in Vain here).
>> If one believes in a God, are you saying it is embedded in ones genetic
>> makeup?

>
> What didn't you understand about the word "indoctrination"?


Ok, I will give you that point on indoctrination, you got me on that one.
I admit, I lean toward the opposite biased view that many believe in God,
like personality types are born with the genetic traits to believe in a
God.

I lean towards the statement, " Great leaders are first born, then made". I
believe that the tendencies for belief in a God is first born with those
traits. Then their environments direct them towards specific religious
beliefs. Those that are born without those tendencies will reject those
indoctrinated teachings and base there life on reason. They will be the
outcast (few and far between).

A key word here is faith that may have effected my reading. I define Faith:
believing in something in which all the facts are not there. Anyone who
has a religion, a belief in a God, has to have "faith" that a God exist.
One can have faith with out a God, like I have faith the economy will
improve.

--
Enjoy Life... Nad R (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)
  #38 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Global Warming

On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 03:54:16 +0000 (UTC), Nad R
> wrote:

> sf > wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 01:31:59 +0000 (UTC), Nad R
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> "J. Clarke" > wrote:
> >>> In article >,
> >>> dude says...
> >>>>
> >>>> ravenlynne > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Faith is not a conscious decision, it's something that one has or does
> >>> not have. Many religious adherents do not have faith and there are
> >>> people who have faith but don't accept any religion. If you don't have
> >>> it then you probably will never understand it, and if you do have it
> >>> you'll likely find the antics of the faithless believers amusing.
> >>>
> >>> How one gets it I have no idea--I suspect that it's a matter of early
> >>> indoctrination but that's entirely an uninformed opinion.
> >>
> >> Oh God! (Name used in Vain here).
> >> If one believes in a God, are you saying it is embedded in ones genetic
> >> makeup?

> >
> > What didn't you understand about the word "indoctrination"?

>
> Ok, I will give you that point on indoctrination, you got me on that one.
> I admit, I lean toward the opposite biased view that many believe in God,
> like personality types are born with the genetic traits to believe in a
> God.


You say Nature, she says nurture.
>
> I lean towards the statement, " Great leaders are first born, then made". I
> believe that the tendencies for belief in a God is first born with those
> traits. Then their environments direct them towards specific religious
> beliefs. Those that are born without those tendencies will reject those
> indoctrinated teachings and base there life on reason. They will be the
> outcast (few and far between).


Those with a healthy sense of skepticism will question, but their
conclusion may be to believe, not to reject. It often has to do with
basic personality types.
>
> A key word here is faith that may have effected my reading. I define Faith:
> believing in something in which all the facts are not there. Anyone who
> has a religion, a belief in a God, has to have "faith" that a God exist.


Many people who won't use the term "god" do believe in a higher power.

> One can have faith with out a God, like I have faith the economy will
> improve.


We can always hope.

--

Never trust a dog to watch your food.
  #39 (permalink)   Report Post  
Senior Member
 
Location: WI
Posts: 1,015
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blake murphy[_2_] View Post
On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 15:39:00 +0000, Gorio wrote:

'ravenlynne[_5_ Wrote:
;1566354']On 12/31/2010 10:51 AM, Doug Freyburger wrote:-
sf wrote:-

I'd be willing to bet they are also home schooling their children to
protect them from all that science blather they're teaching in public
schools today. As was mentioned earlier, otherwise reasonable and
intelligent people can get really stupid when the bible is involved.-

Some home school for that reason. If they ever want their kids to get
a
diploma they end up disappointed as a small amount of science is
required.

Some home school because the circulum has declined significantly over
the years. Teaching to an old ciriculum that includes the basics of
western civilization using new materials on the topics is a strategy
used by good private schools and good home schoolers. It's a lot of
work but I do have some acquaintences who do this.

Some home schoolers do it for what I consider political reasons not
religious reasons. The end result can be anywhere along the quality
spectrum, poorly correlated with whether they happen to agree with my
politics.-

Most of the homeschooled children I know are well past the public school

educated kids...but their parents are highly educated and are doing it
because of the school systems and not due to religious reasons.

--
Currently Reading: Falling Free by Lois McMaster Bujold


Kids in my public shool who were home schooled for a time. Thos kidsa
usually excel. I have others who drop out of my public school to be
homeschooled by the same dysfucntional mess that enabled the kid to fail
with no sweat. those kids turn inmate real quick. No mystery: good
parents-good kids, shithead parenrts-shithead kids. Some will break the
mold, and, in my district, we work very hard to give the kid who was
raised by wolves a chance to pass and even excel.

I know what you're saying, though, as publuc universities have adopted
the "you believe in feminsim or you fail" philosophy. I love going to my
public U (Winona State U) but can see how a more conservative person
might feel very uncomfortable there. This is why the Patrick Henry type
schools have sprung up. I'm cool with that.


this is bullshit. you can argue against feminism all you want *as long as
you make your points logically and grammatically*. and if you think you
get a good education at patrick henry, you're mistaken. you get trained to
be a right-wing culture warrior:

The mission of Patrick Henry College, as adopted by the Board of Trustees
September 28, 2002, is "to train Christian men and women who will lead our
nation and shape our culture with timeless biblical values and fidelity to
the spirit of the American founding. In order to accomplish this mission,
the College provides academically excellent higher education with a
biblical worldview using classical liberal arts core curriculum and
apprenticeship methodology." The College's vision is "to aid in the
transformation of American society by training Christian students to serve
God and mankind with a passion for righteousness, justice and mercy,
through careers of public service and cultural influence."

The College's "Statement of Faith" includes, but is not limited to, the
acknowledgment that "Jesus Christ literally will come to earth again in the
Second Advent" and that "Satan exists as a personal, malevolent being who
acts as tempter and accuser, for whom Hell, the place of eternal
punishment, was prepared, where all who die outside of Christ shall be
confined in conscious torment for eternity."

Patrick Henry College - SourceWatch

no thanks. patrick henry grads become republican *apparatchiks*.

blake
I'm not saying I align with the philosophy of Patrick Henry, I just say they have every right to exist; even though their curricular focus is about 180 degrees from my own.

No, you DON'T argue against feminist theory, because any logical argument you present, in perfect APA, would be shot down now, and you would be held in contempt for it. I'd like to say I've tried, but it's an unspoken rule of public university life: you don't argue about feminism or racism if you are a white male. I'm not sayng I'm shot down. I'm saying I have no say, as I am neither female, nor of color.

I am still going there Jinx (since '07). Finishing up my Master's in Counseling degree. I harbor no ill-will to feminist theory per se. It's just that it's blindly accepted that sexism and racism are status quo on the part of white males. That paints with a broader brush than I would. On the other hand, much, much, much of the oppression in our time and place have been perpetrated by white males. I'm not crying about it. Just hate to make generalizations in any direction.

Climate change is a similar theme in public U. You don't even debate it; because it's accepted as true already. It was accepted as true when it was called "global warming." Now, it appears the warming has subsided in places, and cold has moved in.

It is very hard to prove through the research I've seen, the correlation between (warming, now change) and human activity. Again, I accept it as a valid hypothesis that deserves much attention; but THEORY? Not yet.

I think Patrick Henry students and supporters would argue that our Public universities are just training people to be left-wing socialists. I'd say that the truth is somewhere in the middle. I'm happy with my university, though. Winona does a nice job and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it to any student I counsel, nor my own kids. Nice school. I've never been to Patrick Henry, nor do I aspire to visit. I'm just saying they, as a private U, have every right to exist as a public U does, so long as they meet certification guidelines, should be held as legit in what they are certified to grant diplomas.

It might bug you that PH doesn't take your side. The problem is not in the disagreement, rather with the lack of insight and foresight to listen to the other side as having a legitimate argument.

When I career counsel a high school kid, my job is not to steer them into a liberal or conservative school, but to open the doors to the school in which they wish to excel and follow their dreams. If that's a Diesel Mechanic's school, so be it. My job is not to make a bunch of liberals or conservatives. It's allowing kids to choose between the two and to understand that there is such a thing as moderation between the two. It's our bipolar political nature that hurts us in the US, IMO.

Personally, I'm a social liberal (*** marriage, not even an issue with me, let *** folks marry; abortion, I can't even judge, as I am a male.) I am, however fiscally conservative and think our federal government has stepped way out of the boundaries set by the constitution, and jumped into areas reserved for the states to have the power of say. The further your tax dollar travels from you, the easier it gets lost.

Last edited by Gorio : 04-01-2011 at 07:13 PM
  #40 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,986
Default Global Warming

On 1/4/2011 7:26 AM, Gorio wrote:
> Personally, I'm a social liberal (*** marriage, not even an issue with
> me, let *** folks marry; abortion, I can't even judge as, I am a male.)
> I am, however fiscally conservative and think our federal government has
> stepped way out of the boundaries set by the constitution, and jumped
> into areas reserved for the states to have the power of say. The further
> your tax dollar travels from you, the easier it gets lost.


Ditto. It's too bad there is not a party for us.

Becca
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Global Warming Nad R General Cooking 2 02-01-2011 11:09 PM
Global Warming Dan L General Cooking 1 29-12-2010 03:44 AM
Global Warming and what you can do to against it .. General Cooking 0 14-12-2009 09:41 PM
Global Warming Beach Runner Vegan 25 06-08-2005 03:16 AM
Global Warming Beach Runner Vegan 25 02-08-2005 12:53 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"