Dark Matter Finally Identified!
I’ve solved the mystery that astrophysicists have been puzzling over for decades: What is dark matter?
That’s easy! It’s Anti-Science!
We’re surrounded by it. It’s everywhere! Just look. Here’s a bunch right here!
It obviously makes up the majority of the matter in the United States alone; therefore (and I’m extrapolating here), it must make up the majority of the matter in the rest of the universe.
For my next miracle, I will explain why so many women and minorities vote Republican.
OK, on second thought, maybe I can’t explain that one.
On the anti-science front, there was an article in the San Francisco Chronicle yesterday about the quandary the Republican presidential hopefuls are in when they come out here to Silicon Valley:
But the Republican candidates’ views on climate change are being met with the most raised eyebrows in Silicon Valley, the mecca of political fundraising, tech innovation and venture capital dollars.
“In a valley of scientists, engineers and entrepreneurs, the science behind climate change is overwhelmingly accepted,” said Carl Guardino, president and CEO of the nonpartisan Silicon Valley Leadership Group, which represents more than 325 of the region’s top companies.
That will hurt them a bit financially, but I suspect there is more than enough stupid money in the rest of the country to make up for it.
Fortunately, their irrational beliefs will also make it harder for almost any of these Republican to carry the state in 2012.
There is little doubt about climate change among likely California voters, 61 percent of whom believe that the effects of global warming have already begun, according to a July survey by the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California.
It also might work against them, to some extent, in the rest of the country.
Nationally, 55 percent of Americans believe that global warming is a “serious personal threat,” according to a Gallup survey in August.
Here’s where it gets good:
The bad news for Republican presidential candidates: The Public Policy Institute survey found that 62 percent of independent voters, who are the swing voters in the state, believe that, too.
Of course, they always have the idiot core:
Thirty-two percent of California Republicans believe that the effects of global warming “will never happen,” the poll also found.
That’s just not enough to carry the state. If things were settled purely rationally (the way they ought to be!), the election would already be over in California. Just hand over those 55 electoral votes to Barack Obama!
In reality, since Obama is a thoroughly incompetent president, he’ll probably manage to hand over those 55 electoral votes to the Republicans.
An example of this is best illustrated by this tweet from God regarding the recent earthquake on the East Coast:
There was just a 5.8 earthquake in Washington. Obama wanted it to be 3.4, but the Republicans wanted 5.8, so he compromised.
But let’s get back to the Chronicle article:
Only one major Republican candidate has dared to challenge his party on these views. Last month, Jon Huntsman, a former U.S. ambassador to China and Utah governor, tweeted: “To be clear. I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy.”
He is crazy. By Republican standards.
He has other problems, so I could never support Huntsman, but I still wish he’d be the Republican’s pick. Actually, I really wish they’d pick Michelle Bachmann. She’s so crazy that she probably couldn’t win the general election.
Since the Republicans will probably nominate someone else, My hope is for Huntsman. If they pick a “moderate” (by Republican standards), whoever that is will probably win. I’d rather we have a pro-science Republican in the White House than an anti-science Republican. All of the other GOP candidates are anti-science.
In addition to climate-change denial, all of the other candidates also deny evolution. The Chronicle article briefly touches on those views too.
Rick Perry has described himself as “a firm believer in intelligent design as a matter of faith and intellect…”
OK, I can understand it being a matter of faith. But intellect?
…and has called evolution “a theory” with “some gaps in it.”
I think it’s his brain that has some gaps in it.
Mitt Romney appears to be taking a nuanced position. “I believe God is intelligent, and I believe he designed the creation,” he said.
He’s not taking a nuanced approach. That’s exactly what the Intelligent Design creationists are saying.
“And I believe he used the process of evolution to create the human body.”
This actually shows that not only does Romney not understand evolution, he doesn’t understand Intelligent Design creationism! According to Michael Behe and the other pushers of this drug, evolution alone isn’t capable of creating us. God had to step in at critical points during our evolution and poof us to the next stage.
Who let the crazy woman in here? How did she get out of bed this morning? Didn’t anybody check her straps?
…has claimed that “hundreds and hundreds of scientists, many of them holding Nobel Prizes,” believe in intelligent design, as she does.
If by “hundreds and hundreds” she means “one or two” and by “many of them holding Nobel Prizes” she means “none of them”, then she’s absolutely correct!
But she said government shouldn’t take sides in scientific debates “when there is reasonable doubt on both sides.”
She’s right. Some scientists look at her brain scans and claim to see activity. Other scientists only see a wet gray sponge. The government shouldn’t take sides in that debate until we can cut her open and check. Evidence! We need more evidence, people!
Ron Paul said he does not accept the theory of evolution. “The creator that I know created us, each and every one of us, and created the universe, and the precise time and manner,” Paul has said, although he has also said there is no “absolute proof on either side.”
Science doesn’t work on absolute proof. It works on data. In the case of evolution, “absolute” refers to the absolute mountain of data we have supporting it. Where is any data supporting his claim?
Newt Gingrich!? Is that guy still around?
…has said, “I believe that creation as an act of faith is true, and I believe that science as a mechanical process is true.… Both can be true.”
What does that even mean? The universe had two origins? A created origin and a mechanical origin? When we finally look, the act of observing will make the entire universe collapse!
He says both should be taught in schools, evolution as a science and intelligent design “as a philosophy.”
ID creationism isn’t philosophy. It isn’t the intellectual equivalent of Plato or Kant. Just try to justify teaching creationism in the schools, Newt! You’ll discover you Kant.
Jon Huntsman is the only candidate in the GOP ranks who has taken a strong position in support of evolution, recently tweeting, “I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy.”
Rick Santorum, who calls himself a fierce believer in creationism, jabbed back at Huntsman, saying, “I believe in Genesis 1:1 – God created the heavens and the earth. I don’t know exactly how God did it or exactly how long it took him, but I do know that he did it.”
And I do know that the Republicans are hell-bent on destroying science and science education. Lose your house in the Republican-caused Great Recession? Don’t worry! Just vote Republican a few more times, and we’ll all be living in nice warm caves again! Then we’ll be arguing over “teaching the controversy” and the “strengths and weaknesses” of the theory of fire.