Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Evolution is observable and repeatable... it is the basis of biology and genetics. You have no idea what you are talking about. I advise you to take a biology class before you try and speak about science again or try and sound educated to make an asinine point.
People who identified as Strong Democrat or Not-Strong Democrat said that the earth went around the sun 73.8%.
People who identified as Strong Republican or Not-Strong Republican said that the earth went around the sun 80%.
People who identified as Independent Near Democrat said that 75.6%
People who identified as Independent Near Republican said that 80.9%
People who identified anywhere on the Democrat side said that 75.8%
People who identified anywhere on the Republican side said 80.2%
People who identified as Strong Democrat or Not-Strong Democrat said that the earth went around the sun in a year 78.8%.
People who identified as Strong Republican or Not-Strong Republican said that the earth went around the sun in a year 84.3%.
People who identified as Independent Near Democrat said that 87.3%
People who identified as Independent Near Republican said that 73.4%
People who identified anywhere on the Democrat side said that 81.4%
People who identified anywhere on the Republican side said 81.4%
Both questions
People who identified as Strong Democrat or Not-Strong Democrat 52.9%
People who identified as Strong Republican or Not-Strong Republican 65%
Reporters suck at math
Last edited by Michigantown; 04-11-2014 at 10:41 AM..
51% of Democrats do not know that the Earth goes around the Sun, once a year!
I have always thought that we need to get religious dogma out of our schools and science classes!
Quote:
The longest delayed apology I can think of came from the Catholic Church, in 1992, to Galileo:
Moving formally to rectify a wrong, Pope John Paul II acknowledged in a speech today that the Roman Catholic Church had erred in condemning Galileo 359 years ago for asserting that the Earth revolves around the Sun.
The address by the Pope before the Pontifical Academy of Sciences closed a 13-year investigation into the Church’s condemnation of Galileo in 1633, one of history’s most notorious conflicts between faith and science. Galileo was forced to recant his scientific findings to avoid being burned at the stake and spent the remaining eight years of his life under house arrest.
John Paul said the theologians who condemned Galileo did not recognize the formal distinction between the Bible and its interpretation.
Do you realize the irony of your post? You're criticizing others for their lack of scientific knowledge while claiming evolution is just a theory.
Guess what, so is heliocentrism. So is gravity. Every scientific phenomenon is a theory. Why are you putting your faith in the theory that the earth revolves around the Sun? Even the Bible rejects that view.
So true. And even when their lies are exposed, they still cling to them, such as with the "AGW" scandal and the East Anglia Emails.
Nothing was exposed. Right wingers made claims. These claims had no substance. Here's proof. Please understand I don't expect this to change your mind, as denialists don't base their opinions on facts. I'm just exposing right-wing denialists as liars. Again.
Quote:
In November 2009, the servers at the University of East Anglia in Britain were illegally hacked and emails were stolen. When a selection of emails between climate scientists were published on the internet, a few suggestive quotes were seized upon by many claiming global warming was all just a conspiracy. A number of independent enquiries have investigated the conduct of the scientists involved in the emails. All have cleared the scientists of any wrong doing:
In February 2010, the Pennsylvania State University released an Inquiry Report that investigated any 'Climategate' emails involving Dr Michael Mann, a Professor of Penn State's Department of Meteorology. They found that "there exists no credible evidence that Dr. Mann had or has ever engaged in, or participated in, directly or indirectly, any actions with an intent to suppress or to falsify data". On "Mike's Nature trick", they concluded "The so-called “trick”1 was nothing more than a statistical method used to bring two or more different kinds of data sets together in a legitimate fashion by a technique that has been reviewed by a broad array of peers in the field."
In March 2010, the UK government's House of Commons Science and Technology Committee published a report finding that the criticisms of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) were misplaced and that CRU’s "Professor Jones’s actions were in line with common practice in the climate science community".
In April 2010, the University of East Anglia set up an international Scientific Assessment Panel, in consultation with the Royal Society and chaired by Professor Ron Oxburgh. The Report of the International Panel assessed the integrity of the research published by the CRU and found "no evidence of any deliberate scientific malpractice in any of the work of the Climatic Research Unit".
In June 2010, the Pennsylvania State University published their Final Investigation Report, determining "there is no substance to the allegation against Dr. Michael E. Mann".
In July 2010, the University of East Anglia published the Independent Climate Change Email Review report. They examined the emails to assess whether manipulation or suppression of data occurred and concluded that "we find that their rigour and honesty as scientists are not in doubt."
In September 2010, the UK Government responded to the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report, chaired by Sir Muir Russell. On the issue of releasing data, they found "In the instance of the CRU, the scientists were not legally allowed to give out the data". On the issue of attempting to corrupt the peer-review process, they found "The evidence that we have seen does not suggest that Professor Jones was trying to subvert the peer review process. Academics should not be criticised for making informal comments on academic papers".
In August 2011, the National Science Foundation concluded"Finding no research misconduct or other matter raised by the various regulations and laws discussed above, this case is closed".
As you can see, there's no reason for anyone to take your claims seriously.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
