 |
| They voted, see |
In one of the more curious moments in the Republican debate on Wednesday night, Gov. Rick Perry of Texas invoked 17th-century science in discussing his doubts about climate change. He cited the astronomer and mathematician Galileo Galilei — often called the father of modern science — in suggesting that the current thinking that climate change is a result of human activity could be overturned. “Galileo got outvoted for a spell,” he said.
On the surface, though, his example seemed to illustrate the opposite of the point that Mr. Perry might have been trying to make. Galileo, whose astronomical observations confirmed the Copernican theory that the Earth revolved around the Sun, was basing his assertions on empirical knowledge and faced opposition from the Roman Catholic Church, which supported the Ptolemaic view of an Earth-centered universe.
Mr. Perry, by contrast, has said repeatedly that he does not believe the empirical evidence compiled by scientists in support of climate change, but that he does adhere to faith-based principles.
Was Mr. Perry trying to depict Galileo as a maverick among scientific thinkers of his time? If so, the governor was wrong, says one historian who has studied the trial of Galileo.
“If Perry means to say that at some point some body of scientists said Galileo was wrong, that didn’t happen,” said the historian, Thomas F. Mayer, who teaches at Augustana College in Rock Island, Ill.
. . .
Perhaps, then, Mr. Perry was referring to the church’s trial of Galileo on charges of heresy, in 1633, in which the astronomer was convicted and sentenced to house arrest. In that case he was “outvoted” not by other scientists but by church leaders.
. . .
The 1633 trial was not really about science, many historians say. It was about Galileo’s disobeying a 1616 order to abandon Copernican views….
Check out Rick "Dunce" Perry's college transcripts. A sampling:
 |
| An F in organic chemistry--the second time around. |
 |
| Perry greets our own trustee Tom Fuentes, et al., Thursday |
21 comments:
It's all irrelevant hogwash being brought up by the left to complexify things, and hopefully succeed in ruining his chances as a candidate. That’s the reoccurring strategy; take ‘em out early on. To people who are capable of thinking for themselves: We all know the left’s game by now, so don’t let them fool you. The reality is one doesn’t have to be a rocket scientist (or Ph.D. for that matter) to be a great leader, just take a look at IVC’s leaders... How would the left attempt to scientifically quantify allegiance to one’s own country, something the incumbent seriously lacks? If they had applied this illusive methodology in 2007 it would’ve very quickly ruled out their own Obama for sure. What’s the matter bvt, don’t believe in science anymore?
"Complexify"?
Dude, go out and buy a dictionary. Then go home, close the door, and never be heard from again.
Really. "Reoccurring"? Perhaps you mean "recurring."
"Illusive"? I think you mean "elusive."
But getting the words right won't really help, will it?
Oh, dear. Trolls seem to be abounding these days. Or else one troll is unusually active. Sigh. 5:53: it is a college blog. You could easily go and spread your uneducated, misinformed, and snarky assertions all over Facebook or YouTube instead--please--if you must have an audience. Better: go take a course in reasoning and logic, plus some others in English, science, and other areas in which you are deeply lacking.
Silly Libtards, everyone knows that anyone will be better than Obumble
Wow, that transcript is pathetic. Do we really want someone who received a "D" in Econ to be running this country?
5:53 dropped this on us: "How would the left attempt to scientifically quantify allegiance to one’s own country, something the incumbent seriously lacks?"
What on earth does this mean? It's essentially an incomplete hypothetical and barely a rhetorical question. I will say, though, that those who seek to have the vast majority of the country's assets in the hands of a very few, while the living standards of the population shrink in proportion with the destruction of the environment, are the ones whose allegiances should be questioned.
Why have we not seen Obama's college transcripts, papers he's written, or heard from any of his classmates? We've found out about some of his very questionable associations. Seems to me he's been using our tax money to buy off people to keep hush, like he used $2M to pay lawyers to keep his birth certificate under wraps. How about he discloses his source of funding for his education, no doubt we all paid for that. Seems to me the only stuff that's available on Obama is tightly controlled by him at our expense. You folks don't esee anything wrong with that? And finally, it's come out in the news today that Obama's Social Security number doesn't even pass e-verify.
I had as student at IVC who had gone to school with Obama - just sayin'.
Don't feed the trolls, even if you got good food!
(But I would like to hear more about your student! Why doesn't the college tout this?)
It's always the same response. Instead of making a good counter argument, it's always "dont feed the trolls... and conservatives are stupid... " Is that all you got? The fact is people really like Perry and it just drives the the libs & commies nuts, because they realize the romantisized Obama gig is up, and there's nothing they or their all powerful media pals can do at this point to salvage the supposed great one's presidency.
Okay troll - here's some chow: the former IVC student who went to school with young Obama is also a veteran of our armed services and served in Afghanistan. Chew on that.
Politico provided an overview of Obama’s college years a few years ago. Check it out. Obviously, no one doubts that Obama is intelligent and well-educated. I do wish BvT would just zap him. What an idiot.
Obama is obviously the Manchurian candidate sent by his master to control our state! Show us this student of yours who knew him way back when! Show us the x-rays of his teeth! Show us the terrible poems he wrote at Oxy!
One does not make a counter-argument to those who assert that the earth is flat.
Asserting Obama's a phony liar who is unfit to lead is valid, and not the same as asserting the earth is flat. One cannot debate with fallacies either, i.e. ad hominem.
Umm, 11:49, saying Obama is a phony liar who is unfit to lead is the perfect example of an ad hominem.
Now run along and help the Koch brothers ruin the country some more. There's a good boy. Maybe later they'll give you a treat, like letting you wash a Bentley or two.
Stating the obvious facts is not ad hominem. Quit trying to transform our America. If you want Socialism, move to Europe. Its actually quite simple.
Please indulge us with an "obvious fact."
And, pal, it's not "our America" when what you mean is your vision of America, which is obviously several enclaves of gated communities surrounded by slums with churches on every corner. And what's wrong with some socialism? It works fine with the VA, you know.
When it comes to moving, though, please go and take your tea bagger friends with you. You're the ones stinking up the place.
Deleting posts again, I see. Aw, bunch of crybabies!
I say, let the cretins shine forth!
Post a Comment