Will the GOP admit and then adapt to their loss?

[Spectral]

I hate the religious republican nonsense, but it is a theory of evolution and they did change the term to climate change.

I don't think you're familiar with what "theory" means in science.

they did change the term to climate change

Who are "they", and when did they do this?

If anything has taught us with science is that the acceptance of an idea without ever questioning it has lead to bad things.

You know who's really good at questioning data and overturning incorrect ideas in science? Other scientists. You know who's really bad at it? People that aren't well informed in science and have no experience in the field.

On Climate change, how did the ice get there in the first place? Was it always magically frozen? How come we aren't seeing more of the outcomes some of the extreme left (Gore) predicted? The fact that people wish to question things isn't wrong, but doing so blindly because of your faith is.

You really need to inform yourself better on each of these, you're talking completely out of your ass.

[Stasso]

I don't think you're familiar with what "theory" means in science.



Who are "they", and when did they do this?



You know who's really good at questioning data and overturning incorrect ideas in science? Other scientists. You know who's really bad at it? People that aren't well informed in science and have no experience in the field.



You really need to inform yourself better on each of these, you're talking completely out of your ass.

Theory isn't the same as an law, I do know that, a theory is a well thought out hypothesis that hasn't had enough to disprove it, and there has been some holes in evolution not enough to make me ever think we don't evolve but enough to ask what else can cause us to change over time?

They is the scientific community, you must not have been in touch with the ever changing nature of science.

I am serious that we have only witness one global warming cycle out of possible hundreds, that is like in math taking one graph point and making the line the way you wish it to go. The fact that ice has to have been water at some time to freeze tells me that there must have been a time in our planet's history that it was warm enough for water to settle in the poles prior to their freezing.

Pretty much you I agree that the GOP needs to change but to say that no one is ever allow to question anything solely because they aren't a scientist is close minded. Was the printing press made by a scientist? Plus what do you really know about me to say I am not a scientist nor a major in science? You are jumping to conclusion instead of addressing the points and that is an annoyance I have had with people who claim to be from the left.

[TCD4LYFE]

Democratic Party is for assisting the poor (Welfare). There are people who abuse this system and that system is quite easily taken advantage of and will continue to do so until it is fixed. GOP is against Welfare, but the numbers who use it are hefty and now they vote. So...they need to do some rebuilding. Finding a charismatic, young guy would be a solid start!

Edit: Spelling is srsbusiness.

[Rukentuts]

I found the following really interesting, albeit not unexpected.

[sulfuric]

I hate the religious republican nonsense, but it is a theory of evolution and they did change the term to climate change. If anything has taught us with science is that the acceptance of an idea without ever questioning it has lead to bad things.

On Climate change, how did the ice get there in the first place? Was it always magically frozen? How come we aren't seeing more of the outcomes some of the extreme left (Gore) predicted?

"For the United States, climate change impacts include sea level rise for coastal
states, greater threats of extreme weather events, and increased risk of
regional water scarcity, urban heat waves, western wildfires, and the
disturbance of biological systems throughout the country. The severity
of climate change impacts is expected to increase substantially in the
coming decades." - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and U.S. Global Change Research


Which of these predictions do you think have not occurred? Also as far as the theory of evolution goes, it is accepted widely as fact by the entire international body of scientists. Scientific theory is not a flimsy thing, it is as close to absolute fact as anything can be.

[Raybourne]

The essence of conservatism is careful change. If the GOP cannot adapt and change in some way, then it won't survive.

And that scares me. Either we have a 2-party system or a no-party system, but a system where the GOP dissolves into factions would, as things are now, leave us with one huge party and tons of smaller ones, and that is bad. That is awful.

No, the essence of conservatism is not change. By contrast, progressivism is change. Moderate conservatives would be careful with change, being more pragmatic.

[Herecius]

No, the essence of conservatism is not change. By contrast, progressivism is change. Moderate conservatives would be careful with change, being more pragmatic.

The essence of death is failing to change and adapt. A country cannot survive without changing, but a proper conservative person will warn of changing too much. And that's ok! But not changing at all? That's folly. What you call 'moderate conservative' I call the only logical way to be conservative. There's no room for extreme conservatism because it's suicide in a world that demands change of some sort.

[Spectral]

Theory isn't the same as an law, I do know that, a theory is a well thought out hypothesis that hasn't had enough to disprove it

No, it isn't.

and there has been some holes in evolution not enough to make me ever think we don't evolve but enough to ask what else can cause us to change over time?

No, there aren't.

They is the scientific community, you must not have been in touch with the ever changing nature of science.

I'm an immunologist, I do vaccine research for a living. It's always kind of funny when someone informs me that I don't really know how science works, particularly when it's someone that's demonstrated that they don't get the basics.

Pretty much you I agree that the GOP needs to change but to say that no one is ever allow to question anything solely because they aren't a scientist is close minded. Was the printing press made by a scientist? Plus what do you really know about me to say I am not a scientist nor a major in science? You are jumping to conclusion instead of addressing the points and that is an annoyance I have had with people who claim to be from the left.

If you're indeed a science major, your professors have done a very poor job informing you. A theory isn't a hypothesis; that's not even remotely close. There aren't "holes" in the theory of evolution.

People can question things all they like, but they're probably going to be asking the wrong questions if they're not actually well informed on the topic. I do science for a living, yet I have no delusion that I'm qualified to be a "climate skeptic". It's simply not possible to be well versed in everything; having a tentative trust for experts works a lot better.

[Stasso]

"For the United States, climate change impacts include sea level rise for coastal
states, greater threats of extreme weather events, and increased risk of
regional water scarcity, urban heat waves, western wildfires, and the
disturbance of biological systems throughout the country. The severity
of climate change impacts is expected to increase substantially in the
coming decades." - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and U.S. Global Change Research


Which of these predictions do you think have not occurred? Also as far as the theory of evolution goes, it is accepted widely as fact by the entire international body of scientists. Scientific theory is not a flimsy thing, it is as close to absolute fact as anything can be.

You mean the lack of hurricane for two seasons after a prediction from the 05 with three hurricanes.

---------- Post added 2012-11-09 at 06:36 PM ----------

No, it isn't.



No, there aren't.



I'm an immunologist, I do vaccine research for a living. It's always kind of funny when someone informs me that I don't really know how science works, particularly when it's someone that's demonstrated that they don't get the basics.



If you're indeed a science major, your professors have done a very poor job informing you. A theory isn't a hypothesis; that's not even remotely close. There aren't "holes" in the theory of evolution.

People can question things all they like, but they're probably going to be asking the wrong questions if they're not actually well informed on the topic. I do science for a living, yet I have no delusion that I'm qualified to be a "climate skeptic". It's simply not possible to be well versed in everything; having a tentative trust for experts works a lot better.

A theory starts out as a hypothesis, that is what I was saying. The holes in evolution is the missing link for humans, the platypus and the large lack of fossilize evidence due to the nature of how fossilization works. I thank you for correcting me as I may have been misinformed but that doesn't mean I don't think that climate change isn't completely human cause, it is created from a large number of variables and it is arrogant of us to assume we know what all the variables are.

[Spectral]

yet recreating evolution isn't possible yet.

I take it you're not familiar with antibiotic resistant bacteria? Dogs? Livestock?

Does not mean that it won't be a law but it isn't now.

Let's be very clear - you don't know what "law" and "theory" mean. There's no possible way for their to be a "law of evolution". It'll always be a theory, and quite a strong one. Likewise, all the mechanisms for gravitation that have been proposed are actually theories of gravitation, not laws. The law simply describes something we observe, the theory describes the underlying mechanism (in this case).

[sulfuric]

You mean the lack of hurricane for two seasons after a prediction from the 05 with three hurricanes. You are right a theory is not a flimsy thing but a theory isn't a law, it is a law of gravity and a theory of evolution, we can recreate gravity yet recreating evolution isn't possible yet. Does not mean that it won't be a law but it isn't now.

---------- Post added 2012-11-09 at 06:36 PM ----------



A theory starts out as a hypothesis, that is what I was saying. The holes in evolution is the missing link for humans, the platypus and the large lack of fossilize evidence due to the nature of how fossilization works. I thank you for correcting me as I may have been misinformed but that doesn't mean I don't think that climate change isn't completely human cause, it is created from a large number of variables and it is arrogant of us to assume we know what all the variables are.

Please, tell me what "scientific" organization you think predicted hurricanes to arrive in a specific year in a specific quantity that you are using to make this statement?

[Spectral]

A theory starts out as a hypothesis, that is what I was saying.

This is generally false. A theory is the result of many hypotheses and comes from making sense of large amounts of data. It's a much broader model than anything covered by a hypothesis, with massive supporting data, and nearly no speculation (or none).

The holes in evolution is the missing link for humans,

There's quite literally no such thing as a missing link.

the platypus

wut

and the large lack of fossilize evidence due to the nature of how fossilization works

There's a massive fossil record.

I don't think that climate change isn't completely human cause, it is created from a large number of variables and it is arrogant of us to assume we know what all the variables are.

There's absolutely no one in climatology that has a model based on the idea that all climate change is caused by humans. You're arguing against a position that doesn't exist.

[Raybourne]

The essence of death is failing to change and adapt. A country cannot survive without changing, but a proper conservative person will warn of changing too much. And that's ok! But not changing at all? That's folly. What you call 'moderate conservative' I call the only logical way to be conservative. There's no room for extreme conservatism because it's suicide in a world that demands change of some sort.

Well I would agree with that!

[SirRobin]

I found the following really interesting, albeit not unexpected.

Meh... Been pretty obvious for a while now.

[Xeones]

There's a massive fossil record.

In warehouse quantity sure... but realtively the record we have now is tiny with huge gaps.

[Sills]

they will either adapt or double down. i dont know which yet

That seems to be where they are heading. The GOP is split and arguing amongst itself what the problem is. Some people say Romney was too conservative regarding social issues, while others say he wasnt conservative enough. We will see who rises for the 2016 nomination and get our answer then.

[lakers01]

Right now, they seem more inclined to double down. Many of them were living in a bubble when it came to information and truly believed Romney was going to get 300+ votes. As such, rather than adjust to the reality of what occurred, they simply have to deny that it's a result of their own policy positions.

---------- Post added 2012-11-09 at 05:57 PM ----------



No, there are not.



No, they are not. For example, the opinion that women can't get pregnant when they're raped is not just as valid as my thoughts on the matter. The belief that evolution is a "lie from the pit of hell" is not just as valid as my thoughts. The idea that all opinions are equally valid is nonsense.

Thank you sir. I have been saying this for a long time. Its one of the reasons that real conversations dont seem to happen that often. When people can't agree on facts it is a major problem and it stops people from getting at the real problems with this country.

[Spectral]

In warehouse quantity sure... but realtively the record we have now is tiny with huge gaps.

Relative to what? The total number of organisms that has existed? Sure. That's not a hole in evolutionary theory at all, though, not even a little bit. A hole would be something that doesn't jibe with what's expected.

[Xeones]

Relative to what? The total number of organisms that has existed? Sure. That's not a hole in evolutionary theory at all, though, not even a little bit. A hole would be something that doesn't jibe with what's expected.

There is no hole. It wouldn't be a theory if it had a hole.

[Stasso]

This is generally false. A theory is the result of many hypotheses and comes from making sense of large amounts of data.



There's quite literally no such thing as a missing link.



wut



There's a massive fossil record.



There's absolutely no one in climatology that has a model based on the idea that all climate change is caused by humans. You're arguing against a position that doesn't exist.

Fossils are rare, ask any paleontologist it is a rare process that happens because of perfect conditions.

This is illustrated by the fact that the number of species known through the fossil record is less than 5% of the number of known living species, suggesting that the number of species known through fossils must be far less than 1% of all the species that have ever lived.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil

I am a humble person so I know when I am wrong and I admit that there are times were I do talk out of my ass and this is prolly one of them, so I apologize, but to get on topic we do need a new party to fill in the gap, it time for one of them to fall or both to fall to give way to more moderate policies. Moderation is view as the an evil in politics and part of the reason the republican have lost the majority in congress. The two party systems leads to stagnant government as neither side wishes to budge.