Is the Republican party done?

[Sava]

What do you expect when the party's coalition is made up of racists, religious extremists and evil wall street people?

[Alexander's Horse]

I'll bet you avatar doesn't vote for them

[Zevico]

Ah, hating science. Isn't it funny how left wing authors write about dressing up their ideas as scientific, and --hey presto!--they dress up their ideas as science?

[Dinner]

Ah, hating science. Isn't it funny how left wing authors write about dressing up their ideas as scientific, and --hey presto!--they dress up their ideas as science?

Dude, it is usually the right wing which is anti-science (anti-evolution, anti-climate science, anti-biology, anti-anything really) where as the very few leftists who are anti-science (hippies who believe in magic crystals and alternative medicine) are made fun of my the left. To compare the anti-science people on the right RUN the god damned right. Why are you ALWAYS so wrong about everything?

[Zevico]

Dude, it is usually the right wing which is anti-science

What do you define as science?

[Dinner]

The proper use of the scientific method.

[Zevico]

The scientific method involves making an observation, formulating a hypothesis based on that observation and testing that hypothesis repeatedly in independent and identical testing environments.

Can you tell me how evolution is a theorem in this sense? Plainly it is not. It is a useful explanation of how the world is as it is today. But leaving that aside we cannot use it to, say, predict that a new species will arise tomorrow.

Now take climate science. Which hypothesis, tested and proven in the above discussed manner, are we discussing exactly?

Or biology. Again--which hypothesis are we discussing here?

[giblets]

Evolution and climate science both involve use of the scientific method but feel free to pretend they don't.

[Zevico]

Feel free to explain how.

[Aeson]

Can you tell me how evolution is a theorem in this sense? Plainly it is not. It is a useful explanation of how the world is as it is today. But leaving that aside we cannot use it to, say, predict that a new species will arise tomorrow.

Just because a prediction can't be made in a chaotic system doesn't mean it isn't science.

In the lab many planned mutations have occurred. Even crop breeding relies on the same principles as evolution. These are tried and tested theories of how genes can be introduced or dropped to enact specific changes.

[Kidlicious]

Weather people make predictions. Sometimes they're right.

[Ben Kenobi]

Evolution and climate science both involve use of the scientific method but feel free to pretend they don't.

There's a difference between 'use' and 'adhere'.

[Sava]

I'll bet you avatar doesn't vote for them

She did. But it was an ironic, solid blue state kind of a vote.

[Sava]

The scientific method involves making an observation, formulating a hypothesis based on that observation and testing that hypothesis repeatedly in independent and identical testing environments.

Can you tell me how evolution is a theorem in this sense? Plainly it is not. It is a useful explanation of how the world is as it is today. But leaving that aside we cannot use it to, say, predict that a new species will arise tomorrow.

Now take climate science. Which hypothesis, tested and proven in the above discussed manner, are we discussing exactly?

Or biology. Again--which hypothesis are we discussing here?

Let the people who passed (or teach) Biology give the lessons about it.

[MrFun]

The scientific method involves making an observation, formulating a hypothesis based on that observation and testing that hypothesis repeatedly in independent and identical testing environments.

Can you tell me how evolution is a theorem in this sense? Plainly it is not. It is a useful explanation of how the world is as it is today. But leaving that aside we cannot use it to, say, predict that a new species will arise tomorrow.

Now take climate science. Which hypothesis, tested and proven in the above discussed manner, are we discussing exactly?

Or biology. Again--which hypothesis are we discussing here?

Fvck. Please, don't ever pretend to know anything about science, okay?