On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 08:47:44 -0500, Warp wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> Not just BoEs, but legislative bodies.  One of our US house of
>> representatives members on the science committee thinks that evolution
>> and the big bang theory are "from the devil".
> 
> The people who appoint completely incompetent people to those positions
> would certain not want for a completely incompetent person to perform
> eg. heart surgery on them. I would like to see the politician who allows
> a witch doctor who thinks that heart problems are caused by evil spirits
> to perform surgery on them. Yet they put completely incompetent people
> on the science committee?

Yep.

But then again, we've got at least one representative who believes that 
vaccines cause autism, because an autistic kid's mother told her so once.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 09:02:45 -0800, Patrick Elliott wrote:

> Unfortunately, if the wrong person wins, it won't be over tomorrow.
> Meanwhile, most of the news seems to have devolved into discussion of
> which one is ahead, not issues. As one cartoon put it, "If Obama wins
> tomorrow, it will be devastating to Romney's tracking polls." lol

That's certainly true.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

> Yeah, well. Even monkeys need to eat, and as things stand, the view, of
> some of the wackos running, seems to be that it costs too much to buy
> them bananas, so its, somehow, their own damn fault that they have to
> eat their own feces. Case in point - My work doesn't pay its lowest
> level employees more than minimum wages. They, if lucky, get 20-30 hours
> a week, average, and then only if unionized, and the company just tacked
> on a $5 a week health care charge, then gave them a 10 cent raise. So..
> They plan to let everyone work 50 hours to make up the difference? Of
> course not... And the current contract "explicitly" states that those
> employees will *never* get a raise, since no one **ever** receives a
> performance raise either, unless the state raises the minimum.

I guess they find it incredibly hard to find anyone to work for them then?

> So, yeah, I would love to see the damn congress idiots, and senate, at
> the minimum, have to try to live on that kind of wage, especially since
> they don't seem to think they have to actually bloody spend time
> working, either.

There's nothing to stop the above people working for your company on the 
minimum wage deciding to go into politics.

I don't know how it is in the US, but in the UK politicians salaries are 
pretty mediocre compared to equivalent jobs in industry. For example our 
prime minister has a salary of £142k, in industry someone in charge of 
what 50-200 people (depending on the industry) could probably be on that 
salary and have a fraction of the responsibility the PM has.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:27:49 +0000, scott wrote:

> There's nothing to stop the above people working for your company on the
> minimum wage deciding to go into politics.

Other than, perhaps, their sense of dignity.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> But then again, we've got at least one representative who believes that 
> vaccines cause autism, because an autistic kid's mother told her so once.

It's curious how the word of a few laymen, with no education nor experience
in the required fields of science, completely trump the thousands and
thousands of hours of scientific experimentation and testing, hundreds
of extensive clinical trials involving thousands of people, all performed
by diverse scientists from around the world, from different countries,
backgrounds and cultures (and who can't possible *all* of them have the
same agenda and be part of the same conspiracy.)

There is, in fact, a psychological phenomenon behind all this. I wrote an
article about that very subject here:

http://grindedgear.blogspot.fi/2012/10/people-are-really-bad-at-grasping.html

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 07/11/2012 4:49 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 08:27:49 +0000, scott wrote:
>
>> There's nothing to stop the above people working for your company on the
>> minimum wage deciding to go into politics.
>
> Other than, perhaps, their sense of dignity.
>


LOL +1

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 12:34:38 -0500, Warp wrote:

> It's curious how the word of a few laymen, with no education nor
> experience in the required fields of science, completely trump the
> thousands and thousands of hours of scientific experimentation and
> testing, hundreds of extensive clinical trials involving thousands of
> people, all performed by diverse scientists from around the world, from
> different countries, backgrounds and cultures (and who can't possible
> *all* of them have the same agenda and be part of the same conspiracy.)

You'd think so, but many people seem to think that their belief and 
ignorance trumps actual knowledge.

xkcd yesterday/today summed it up pretty well, I thought.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 07/11/2012 7:44 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> You'd think so, but many people seem to think that their belief and
> ignorance trumps actual knowledge.

That is what faith means. I believe it without proof. A plus in some 
quarters, I believe.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
> On 07/11/2012 7:44 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> > You'd think so, but many people seem to think that their belief and
> > ignorance trumps actual knowledge.

> That is what faith means. I believe it without proof. A plus in some 
> quarters, I believe.

Why is it that in many religions (and also in many superstitious belief
systems) faith is considered a virtue? And they are explicitly referring
to believing without actual proof or evidence. They talk as if proof would
diminish and soil the value of the belief, and that the less proof you
have, the better!

(Of course this is a defense mechanism that has naturally formed that
keeps superstitious beliefs alive, but I just can't understand why people
swallow it so easily.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 07/11/2012 8:07 PM, Warp wrote:
> Stephen <mca### [at] aolcom> wrote:
>> On 07/11/2012 7:44 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>> You'd think so, but many people seem to think that their belief and
>>> ignorance trumps actual knowledge.
>
>> That is what faith means. I believe it without proof. A plus in some
>> quarters, I believe.
>
> Why is it that in many religions (and also in many superstitious belief
> systems)


Is there a difference? (I am not being funny.)


faith is considered a virtue? And they are explicitly referring
> to believing without actual proof or evidence. They talk as if proof would
> diminish and soil the value of the belief, and that the less proof you
> have, the better!

That is how I see it too.

>
> (Of course this is a defense mechanism that has naturally formed that
> keeps superstitious beliefs alive, but I just can't understand why people
> swallow it so easily.)
>

I think that there are two reasons (at least).

1/	No one wants to stop existing when they die so the believe in a 
religion that promises life after death.

2/	A lot of people find it hard to "think outside of the box" and 
believe what they are brought up with as a matter of course.

3/ Lots of people are really STUPID! (Did I say that out loud?)

BTW I think that the talk in this thread (not you) where some people 
discuss just how intelligent/wise you should be before you should be 
allowed to vote, is marching to the sound of the Goose step.

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message