Simpsons did it . . .
The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
What if the government was run by scientists?
|
Simpsons did it . . .
The granting of a pardon is an imputation of guilt, and the acceptance a confession of it.
(February 19, 2017 at 10:24 am)WisdomOfTheTrees Wrote:(February 19, 2017 at 10:23 am)mh.brewer Wrote: Ethics are in the scientists, not the method.Self scrutiny, peer review, clarity of language, accuracy. These are ethical principles. Practiced by people of science, not science method.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental.
(February 19, 2017 at 10:29 am)mh.brewer Wrote:I mean sure, just knowing the method doesn't mean you're a scientist. I suppose one would also require much education in whatever field of science one is studying. I think you're right on this one.(February 19, 2017 at 10:24 am)WisdomOfTheTrees Wrote: Self scrutiny, peer review, clarity of language, accuracy. These are ethical principles. (February 19, 2017 at 10:38 am)WisdomOfTheTrees Wrote:(February 19, 2017 at 10:29 am)mh.brewer Wrote: Practiced by people of science, not science method.I mean sure, just knowing the method doesn't mean you're a scientist. I suppose one would also require much education in whatever field of science one is studying. I think you're right on this one. There are plenty of people out there that claim they are scientists with questionable ethics. Check out a Dr. Mercola to start.
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental.
Quote:I can see why I blocked you. You say things like this with nothing to convince me of this. You expect me to just take "scientists make bad politicians" without any reason. You're a pseud. Interesting that you were able to read my post after having blocked me, but no matter. The reason I didn't go into more detail about scientists being lousy politicos is that you can use the internet as well as I can. Had you done a few brief web searches, you might never have started this thread. Since you seem to prefer being spoon-fed, I'll provide you with a few examples: Isaac Newton: Member of Parliament for a total of two years, he never engaged in debate or offered a single piece of legislation to be considered (his only comment is reputed to be that he asked a window be closed). As master of the Royal Mint, he precipitated a silver crisis. He managed to get on the wrong side of the Astronomer Royal (and thus the Court in general), because of some shady publishing he engaged in. Max Weber: Helped to author and vigorously defended Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution. Margaret Thatcher: Economic policies which caused significant recession, institution of a poll tax, drastic cuts to education funding which resulted in a ten year 'brain drain' (Britons going overseas to school), some of the highest petrol prices in UK history due to taxes. Have yourself a wee google - you might learn something. Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
(February 19, 2017 at 10:10 am)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:(February 19, 2017 at 9:59 am)Alex K Wrote: Lazy cheap shot, Chad. That is true, but that's not what you said.
The fool hath said in his heart, There is a God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Psalm 14, KJV revised edition
Anal Sex
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh RE: What if the government was run by scientists?
February 19, 2017 at 2:09 pm
(This post was last modified: February 19, 2017 at 2:11 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
It may be true that scientists make for poor politicians, but I would simply suggest that we need less politicking in government and a hell of alot more science, in any case. At present, we're doling out appointments and electing people to offices where a scientific background would -seem- to be a requirement...on the grounds of their party loyalties and poll popularity with the base.
Let's just run with the idea that a scientist wouldn;t be a good president - probably right on that one. Dept of Energy? Dept of Education? Health and Human Services? EPA?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Cunt
(February 19, 2017 at 2:11 pm)frankiej Wrote:(February 19, 2017 at 2:08 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Anal Sex A queef is a demon that comes out of a woman's vagina when she has had pre marital sex. It's a way for nature to warn the man that he is sleeping with a woman who is impure.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Possibly Related Threads... | |||||
Thread | Author | Replies | Views | Last Post | |
What do scientists say about existence? | Mariosep | 186 | 56971 |
July 20, 2017 at 10:59 am Last Post: The Grand Nudger |
|
Government Has No Incentive To Prevent Crime | Koolay | 22 | 5413 |
September 12, 2013 at 7:39 pm Last Post: sarcasticgeographer |
|
No one Believes in Government | Koolay | 25 | 5870 |
August 5, 2013 at 2:34 pm Last Post: bennyboy |
|
Government as a Religion | Koolay | 75 | 17601 |
July 22, 2013 at 8:30 pm Last Post: Polaris |
|
Government is Irrational. | Koolay | 196 | 44197 |
July 10, 2013 at 8:51 am Last Post: genkaus |
|
Are we all just part of a computer simulation? Scientists are trying to find that out. | TaraJo | 40 | 16655 |
December 26, 2012 at 2:55 pm Last Post: Whateverist |