That would indeed be an effective means to stop cancers and some other diseases, but comes with a rather noteworthy side effect. It also brings human evolution to a halt.
In the medium term (many generations) the percentages for the various existing checksummed genes will shift, but no new genes will enter the gene pool. And in the long term it becomes a statistical certainty that one particular variant of each gene will eventually reach 100% in the population. At that point the entire human population would be genetically identical, identical "clones". The only remaining variation is that there would be male-clones and female-clones.
(For this discussion I am setting aside the potential matter of human genetic engineering creating babies with experimental new genes. That's a rather thorny issue, and it doesn't contradict my original point that natural evolution of humans would halt.)
Would you also say all infections be categorized as one disease? Cholera, syphilis, anthrax, leprosy, bubonic plague, tuberculosis, strep, tetanus, typhoid fever, diphtheria, chlamydia...
it's just the pathological replication of bacteria in the body. Yes, different types of bacteria may have different behaviors, although they also all have a litany of identical behaviors. Yes, it's a fruitful avenue of research to treat different infection types with different methods. But that doesn't mean we should stop looking for broader methods than can treat multiple different kinds of infections based on their numerous shared characteristics. The meme that "infection is a whole spectrum of diseases" is just that, a meme. Researchers who recite that meme don't believe it literally. They do have a much more nuanced perspective on infection. But they use that meme in an attempt to deflate journalists' and lay people's expectations about infection research. And then people echo that meme in an attempt to sound knowledgable and up-to-date.
The "pathological replication of cells (human cells or bacterial cells) in the body" is a pretty generic problem. When the particular cells involved are quite diverse, when the mechanisms and processes and behaviors involved are quite diverse, it seems to me approximately equivalent to categorize various infections and various cancers as different diseases.
If you're going to classify either cancers or infections as a single disease, it maybe seems more reasonable to classify infections as a single disease. At least in that case you have the common target that they are all non-human cells, making it vastly easier to find a single drug or treatment that effectively targets them all. There's no common target in cancers because cancer cells are nothing more than broken human cells, and they are all broken in different ways.
You cannot believe some of our Lord's teachings and ignore others... it's all a part of the complete package and you cannot believe only what is convenient for you. Please reconsider your stance on evolution before it's too late, or you will have all eternity to consider your foolishness as you rot in the pit.
Exactly! That's why I don't wear poly-cotton underwear, no mixed-fiber clothing for me, no-sir-ee. And I don't have kids, but if I ever do they damn well better be sufficiently respectful or I'll stone them to death.
The same researchers plan to do a study on the new electronic social networking phenomena. All of the test subjects will be given pagers for two hours a day.
Encrypting the data certainly isn't a bad idea, but unless I'm missing something here, encrypting the data is nothing more than a lame case of security through obscurity. If the browser stores the data encrypted, then the browser also needs to store the KEY to re-open the file. If someone can get a hold of the file, then they can also get a hold of the key to decrypt that file.
If there's a security problem here, it's the Restore Session functionality itself. Perhaps secure sessions shouldn't be restorable?
Now. Now. If you have won this one, then maybe you should be tolerate... of intolerance. Lots of people would feel better, including you I think.
It's always comical when bigots and oppressors try to whine that they are the victims, try to pull the "show tolerance of intolerance" crap.
If someone wants to deny people equal rights, deny people the right to get married, based on the color of their skin or their religion or gender, then I will defend their rights such as free speech. However I will not invite them to my dinner table. I will not welcome them in my home. I will not welcome them in my social circle. I will earnestly endeavor not to put on damn dollar in their pocket. And I will damn well use MY right to free speech to call them a vile bigoted scum.
Tolerance is a virtue, but tolerance-of-intolerance is self contradictory. Tolerance does not mean I need to be polite or accommodating to a Ku Klux Klan group who are directly harming innocent people, or who inflict or advocate indirect harm of innocent people via laws or other force of government to deny them equal rights.
Whether it's interracial marriage or gay marriage, I do not need to be "tolerant" of the HARM inflicted or advocated in denying people equal rights.
But you must remember that every poll has about a 10%-wide error bar, and it takes a long time to smooth over the noise and really be sure such a trend has set it.
Most polls use the sample size to obtain a 3% or 4% error margin. The percentages I posted was the midpoint of 6 polls taken this year, and they were all within +/- 3% of what I posted. Very consistent. The vast number of polls over the last few decades show a strikingly clear and steady shift.
The political and other major events on the subject don't seem to be really pushing the numbers around. It seems that this is something that's just plain percolating through society, and the political fireworks and the court battles and the news items are more like an effect of this process rather than a driver of it.
You also have to factor in to things that, as gay-marriage acceptance seems becomes more popular, people are more willing to voice such an opinion. So it might not be that attitudes themselves are actually changing, just that people are willing to be more honest in polls.
I suspect almost the opposite. I think positions are changing faster than feelings. I think a lot of the shift is people who are still "uncomfortable" with the idea of gay marriage, but who are actively overcoming that discomfort to try to "do the right thing". I suspect a lot of the ideas and attitudes and understanding developed during the interracial marriage shift are directly responsible for the speed of the gay marriage shift. I think a lot of people are recognizing that "doing the right thing" here means supporting other people's equal rights, even when it means taking an uncomfortable position.
All of the complex factors behind it is why I find it particularly striking to compare it to the equivalent polls on interracial marriage. The shift on gay marriage is almost exactly twice as fast. Whatever the forces and processes are, they are twice as fast this time. That's huge.
Polling on interracial marriage showed it increased in acceptance at a fairly steady rate of 1% per year. Polls show acceptance of gay marriage rising 2% per year. It's currently about 55% support vs 39% against.
Approval of gay marriage is overwhelming among the younger generation, who largely view it as a civil rights issue. The strongest opposition among senior citizens, who are literally dropping dead day by day. There is nothing that can stand against the force of a generational shift.
You lost this fight. You lost this fight several years ago. YOU are the gadfly that has been swatted. Get used to the word "bigot", because you're going to be hearing increasingly often.
Being a criminal is not remotely justification for a Darwin Award. Being a criminal with really bad luck is not justification for a Darwin Award.
I haven't seen the truck or the Cobalt container, but the only way these guys might warrant a Darwin Award is if they ignored flagrant radioactive warning labels.
Then, once you've demonstrated a better than, say, seventy percent probability that you're not such a complete fuckup that you'll destroy an entire company before the top shareholders can grab their loot, you'll be handed the seven- to eight-figure salary position.
And if you do demonstrate that you're a complete fuckup and destroy multiple companies, and a coke problem and a drunk driver, you may instead be handed a Texas governorship and a mere six-figure salary position as president of the United States. Only the not-total-fuckups get the more valuable seven- to eight-figure salary positions.
In 1981 the top tax rate was 70%, and kicked in at $108,300 for individuals and $215,400 for couples. That's hardly "fictitious". We also cut capital gains taxes, which pretty much only apply to the wealthy, which is why Mitt Romney with a net worth of a quarter billion dollars paid a lower tax rate than his secretary. That's not "fictitious".
Under Reagan the overall tax burden (all taxes paid by all Americans, divided all income of all Americans) ranged between 29.2% and 31.1%. In 2010 the overall tax burden was about 26.9%. So overall taxes are down, taxes on the wealthy are WAY down, and taxes on the poor and middle class are up.
For the last thirty years we have been shifting taxes off of the rich and onto the poor and middle class. That's Wealth Redistribution. Government tax changes over the last 30 years is exactly why the rich have been getting richer while the poor and middle class have been getting poorer, and the economy has stagnated. A strong middle class is the core driver of the economy.... the middle class 200+ million majority having money to spend is what drives the economy. And the middle class has been systematically decimated under delusional Trickledown-Economics Wealth Redistribution.
Most liberal/progressives want very high taxes
WTF delusional "very high taxes"? In 1981 we had a top rate of 70%.... and now we have ignorant idiots are screaming that a 30-odd percent top tax rate is "socialism" and "wealth redistribution". Well, they're half right, 30-odd percent *is* wealth redistribution, from the poor and middle class to the wealthy. It's ludicrous to call 30-odd percent or even 40-odd percent to be "very high taxes" when we had 70% top rate while Saint Reagan was president.
Most liberal/progressives want very high taxes on the other guy.
Google "raise my taxes". Google says About 830,000 results. Results for page 1&2: Raise My Taxes, Please! - James Kwak - The Atlantic Google Millionaire Tells Obama: 'Raise My Taxes, Please... Please Raise My Taxes Says This Millionaire - CNBC.com 'Raise my taxes,' town hall attendee tells Obama - Los Angeles Times Wealthy Man Asks Obama 'Please Raise My Taxes' - ABC News Question to Obama: "Would you please raise my taxes?" - CBS News 'Would you please raise my taxes?' | Nealz Nuze | www.wsbradio.com Former Googler Asks Obama: Please Raise My Taxes! - Forbes Buffett: I beg you to raise my taxes - Politico Staff - POLITICO.com Raise My Taxes, Mr. President! - The Daily Beast Daily Kos: So, I voted to raise my taxes * photo diary * Rich man to Obama: 'Please raise my taxes' - USA Today 'Raise My Taxes,' Town-Hall Participant Tells Obama -- VIDEO... Dow Chemical chief: Raise my taxes too - Nov. 18, 2011 - CNN Money Warren Buffett: Please, Raise My Taxes : The Two-Way : NPR Audience Member Asks Obama: 'Would You Please Raise My Taxes... Tell President Obama: Don't Raise My Taxes | Heritage Action for... 15000 Illinois Protesters Chant "Raise My Taxes" - Mish's Global... Jay-Z says President Obama can raise taxes as Congress debates... A millionaire for higher taxes - Washington Post
Else why would all the wealthy people who are in congress ever pass taxes like that?
Ummmm..... how about because their job is to help the nation, help the economy, benefit the American people?
Oh, I'm sorry, I'm living in a fantasy land where politicians make some attempt to do their jobs and strengthen the country. Better than living in some fantasy land where cutting total taxes and cutting the top rate from 70% to 30-odd percent is "very high taxes", and where ideology is more important than economic reality, where ideology is more important than deficit and the debt
And evolutionists do not want students to think critically when it comes to evolution. Cuts both ways, that knife does.
It's the creationist side wielding the knife to cut Critical Thinking skills from education, and the science side fighting to defend and promote critical thinking in education. A Google on oppose teaching " critical thinking skills" returns the following page of links:
Texas GOP's 2012 Platform Opposes Teaching Of 'Critical Thinking... Jun 29, 2012... The Republican Party of Texas' recently adopted 2012 platform contains a plank that opposes the teaching of "critical thinking skills" in schools. talkingpointsmemo.com/.../texas-gop-s-2012-platform-opposes-teaching-of- critical-thinking-skills - 50k - Cached - Similar pages
Texas GOP rejects 'critical thinking' skills. Really. - The Answer... Jul 9, 2012... Knowledge-Based Education â" We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and... www.washingtonpost.com/...critical-thinking-skills.../gJQAHNpFXW_blog. html - Similar pages
Texas GOP Declares: "No More Teaching of 'Critical Thinking Skills... Jul 7, 2012... The Texas GOP's hidden curriculum against critical thinking and other... Texas GOP Declares: "No More Teaching of 'Critical Thinking Skills' in... truth-out.org/.../10144-texas-gop-declares-no-more-teaching-of-critical- thinking-skills-in-texas-public-schools - 62k - Cached - Similar pages
The Terrifying Texas GOP Platform - Forbes Jul 1, 2012... with the portion that opposes the âoeteaching of Higher Order Thinking Skillsâ and âoecritical thinking skills.â Although a partial retraction followed,... www.forbes.com/sites/johntharvey/2012/07/.../texas-gop-platform/ - 115k - Cached - Similar pages
Texas GOP Platform opposes teaching "Critical Thinking Skills" Jun 27, 2012... This kind of stuff I expect from know-nothing Republicans, but opposing the teaching of critical thinking skills in schools? Who needs critical... www.dailykos.com/.../-Texas-GOP-Platform-to-ban-teaching-Critical- Thinking-Skills-in-schools-The-stupid-IT-BURNS - 158k - Cached - Similar pages
Gail Collins says Texas GOP platform calls for schools to... - PolitiFact Aug 11, 2012... We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply... www.politifact.com/.../gail-collins-says-texas-gop-platform-calls-schools/ - 40k - Cached - Similar pages
No Comment Necessary: Texas GOP's 2012 Platform Opposes... Jun 29, 2012... We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply... takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/.../no-comment-necessary-texas-gops-2012- platform-opposes-teaching-critical-thinking-skills/ - 61k - Cached - Similar pages
Half True: What Politifact Got Wrong About the GOP and Critical... Aug 18, 2012..
Exactly. Which is why Intelligent Design conclusively proves Christianity and all the other monotheistic religions false. Only a committee would make specifications for a sewer line discharging right through the middle of a reproductive/recreational area.
Obama's Social Security Number begins 042, a which is only issued to Connecticut residents. This Social Security Number was issued in the late 1970's. Lyme Disease was first identified in Connecticut in.... you guess it... the late 1970's.
Coincidence? I THINK NOT!
Obviously Obama created Lyme Disease in a lab in the 1970's, as part of his plan to manufacture fake evidence of evolution, to turn Americans away from God, to ensure he'd be able to usurp the Presidency of the United States after the new Millennium arrived.
The Streisand Effect certainly draws additional attention to something, but attention doesn't necessarily equate to paying-customer. In this case the movie already approaches a saturation level of publicity, and informing people of Orson Scott Card's extremely offensive bigotry certainly can reduce the number of paying customers. Like it or not, a rapidly rising percentage of the population consider anti-gay bigotry to similarly as offensive as anti-black bigotry. Most people rather avoid socializing with or giving money to bigots.
Slashdot Mirror
Genes just need a digital checksum - get on it!
That would indeed be an effective means to stop cancers and some other diseases, but comes with a rather noteworthy side effect. It also brings human evolution to a halt.
In the medium term (many generations) the percentages for the various existing checksummed genes will shift, but no new genes will enter the gene pool. And in the long term it becomes a statistical certainty that one particular variant of each gene will eventually reach 100% in the population. At that point the entire human population would be genetically identical, identical "clones". The only remaining variation is that there would be male-clones and female-clones.
(For this discussion I am setting aside the potential matter of human genetic engineering creating babies with experimental new genes. That's a rather thorny issue, and it doesn't contradict my original point that natural evolution of humans would halt.)
-
Would you also say all infections be categorized as one disease? Cholera, syphilis, anthrax, leprosy, bubonic plague, tuberculosis, strep, tetanus, typhoid fever, diphtheria, chlamydia...
it's just the pathological replication of bacteria in the body. Yes, different types of bacteria may have different behaviors, although they also all have a litany of identical behaviors. Yes, it's a fruitful avenue of research to treat different infection types with different methods. But that doesn't mean we should stop looking for broader methods than can treat multiple different kinds of infections based on their numerous shared characteristics. The meme that "infection is a whole spectrum of diseases" is just that, a meme. Researchers who recite that meme don't believe it literally. They do have a much more nuanced perspective on infection. But they use that meme in an attempt to deflate journalists' and lay people's expectations about infection research. And then people echo that meme in an attempt to sound knowledgable and up-to-date.
The "pathological replication of cells (human cells or bacterial cells) in the body" is a pretty generic problem. When the particular cells involved are quite diverse, when the mechanisms and processes and behaviors involved are quite diverse, it seems to me approximately equivalent to categorize various infections and various cancers as different diseases.
If you're going to classify either cancers or infections as a single disease, it maybe seems more reasonable to classify infections as a single disease. At least in that case you have the common target that they are all non-human cells, making it vastly easier to find a single drug or treatment that effectively targets them all. There's no common target in cancers because cancer cells are nothing more than broken human cells, and they are all broken in different ways.
-
it wasnt just some band... it was van fuckin halen \m/
I think you mean van fuckin halen \m&m/
-
You cannot believe some of our Lord's teachings and ignore others ... it's all a part of the complete package and you cannot believe only what is convenient for you. Please reconsider your stance on evolution before it's too late, or you will have all eternity to consider your foolishness as you rot in the pit.
Exactly!
That's why I don't wear poly-cotton underwear, no mixed-fiber clothing for me, no-sir-ee.
And I don't have kids, but if I ever do they damn well better be sufficiently respectful or I'll stone them to death.
-
Let's just define God as a metaphor *for* evolution -- everyone wins!
God is a SIMILE for evolution, and God has told us to gather our weapons and smite thee for such blasphemy!
-
The most amazing thing about this vaccine is that it's a tachyon based vaccine.
First the testing is Finnish, and now it begins.
-
Those roaming charges are going to be....
astronomical.
-
No, they have the same size pools.
They just have really small bladders.
-
they plan to re-engineer the Flu virus to come in pastel colors and to manufacture vitamin D.
-
The same researchers plan to do a study on the new electronic social networking phenomena. All of the test subjects will be given pagers for two hours a day.
-
Encrypting the data certainly isn't a bad idea, but unless I'm missing something here, encrypting the data is nothing more than a lame case of security through obscurity. If the browser stores the data encrypted, then the browser also needs to store the KEY to re-open the file. If someone can get a hold of the file, then they can also get a hold of the key to decrypt that file.
If there's a security problem here, it's the Restore Session functionality itself. Perhaps secure sessions shouldn't be restorable?
-
Newly Discovered Greenhouse Gas Is 7,000 Times More Powerful Than CO2
... emitted whenever a politician speaks.
-
Now. Now. If you have won this one, then maybe you should be tolerate ... of intolerance. Lots of people would feel better, including you I think.
It's always comical when bigots and oppressors try to whine that they are the victims, try to pull the "show tolerance of intolerance" crap.
If someone wants to deny people equal rights, deny people the right to get married, based on the color of their skin or their religion or gender, then I will defend their rights such as free speech. However I will not invite them to my dinner table. I will not welcome them in my home. I will not welcome them in my social circle. I will earnestly endeavor not to put on damn dollar in their pocket. And I will damn well use MY right to free speech to call them a vile bigoted scum.
Tolerance is a virtue, but tolerance-of-intolerance is self contradictory. Tolerance does not mean I need to be polite or accommodating to a Ku Klux Klan group who are directly harming innocent people, or who inflict or advocate indirect harm of innocent people via laws or other force of government to deny them equal rights.
Whether it's interracial marriage or gay marriage, I do not need to be "tolerant" of the HARM inflicted or advocated in denying people equal rights.
-
But you must remember that every poll has about a 10%-wide error bar, and it takes a long time to smooth over the noise and really be sure such a trend has set it.
Most polls use the sample size to obtain a 3% or 4% error margin. The percentages I posted was the midpoint of 6 polls taken this year, and they were all within +/- 3% of what I posted. Very consistent. The vast number of polls over the last few decades show a strikingly clear and steady shift.
The political and other major events on the subject don't seem to be really pushing the numbers around. It seems that this is something that's just plain percolating through society, and the political fireworks and the court battles and the news items are more like an effect of this process rather than a driver of it.
You also have to factor in to things that, as gay-marriage acceptance seems becomes more popular, people are more willing to voice such an opinion. So it might not be that attitudes themselves are actually changing, just that people are willing to be more honest in polls.
I suspect almost the opposite. I think positions are changing faster than feelings. I think a lot of the shift is people who are still "uncomfortable" with the idea of gay marriage, but who are actively overcoming that discomfort to try to "do the right thing". I suspect a lot of the ideas and attitudes and understanding developed during the interracial marriage shift are directly responsible for the speed of the gay marriage shift. I think a lot of people are recognizing that "doing the right thing" here means supporting other people's equal rights, even when it means taking an uncomfortable position.
All of the complex factors behind it is why I find it particularly striking to compare it to the equivalent polls on interracial marriage. The shift on gay marriage is almost exactly twice as fast. Whatever the forces and processes are, they are twice as fast this time. That's huge.
-
Polling on interracial marriage showed it increased in acceptance at a fairly steady rate of 1% per year.
Polls show acceptance of gay marriage rising 2% per year. It's currently about 55% support vs 39% against.
Approval of gay marriage is overwhelming among the younger generation, who largely view it as a civil rights issue. The strongest opposition among senior citizens, who are literally dropping dead day by day. There is nothing that can stand against the force of a generational shift.
You lost this fight. You lost this fight several years ago. YOU are the gadfly that has been swatted. Get used to the word "bigot", because you're going to be hearing increasingly often.
-
Being a criminal is not remotely justification for a Darwin Award.
Being a criminal with really bad luck is not justification for a Darwin Award.
I haven't seen the truck or the Cobalt container, but the only way these guys might warrant a Darwin Award is if they ignored flagrant radioactive warning labels.
-
Thus, it's in the enlightened self interest of the wealthy not to get too wealthy (or perceived to be too wealthy)
so..... you're saying they need to spend a bit more on PR?
-
Then, once you've demonstrated a better than, say, seventy percent probability that you're not such a complete fuckup that you'll destroy an entire company before the top shareholders can grab their loot, you'll be handed the seven- to eight-figure salary position.
And if you do demonstrate that you're a complete fuckup and destroy multiple companies, and a coke problem and a drunk driver, you may instead be handed a Texas governorship and a mere six-figure salary position as president of the United States. Only the not-total-fuckups get the more valuable seven- to eight-figure salary positions.
-
because those taxes were fictitious?
In 1981 the top tax rate was 70%, and kicked in at $108,300 for individuals and $215,400 for couples. That's hardly "fictitious". We also cut capital gains taxes, which pretty much only apply to the wealthy, which is why Mitt Romney with a net worth of a quarter billion dollars paid a lower tax rate than his secretary. That's not "fictitious".
Under Reagan the overall tax burden (all taxes paid by all Americans, divided all income of all Americans) ranged between 29.2% and 31.1%. In 2010 the overall tax burden was about 26.9%. So overall taxes are down, taxes on the wealthy are WAY down, and taxes on the poor and middle class are up.
For the last thirty years we have been shifting taxes off of the rich and onto the poor and middle class. That's Wealth Redistribution. Government tax changes over the last 30 years is exactly why the rich have been getting richer while the poor and middle class have been getting poorer, and the economy has stagnated. A strong middle class is the core driver of the economy.... the middle class 200+ million majority having money to spend is what drives the economy. And the middle class has been systematically decimated under delusional Trickledown-Economics Wealth Redistribution.
Most liberal/progressives want very high taxes
WTF delusional "very high taxes"? In 1981 we had a top rate of 70%.... and now we have ignorant idiots are screaming that a 30-odd percent top tax rate is "socialism" and "wealth redistribution". Well, they're half right, 30-odd percent *is* wealth redistribution, from the poor and middle class to the wealthy. It's ludicrous to call 30-odd percent or even 40-odd percent to be "very high taxes" when we had 70% top rate while Saint Reagan was president.
Most liberal/progressives want very high taxes on the other guy.
Google "raise my taxes". ... ... ... ... ... ...
Google says About 830,000 results.
Results for page 1&2:
Raise My Taxes, Please! - James Kwak - The Atlantic
Google Millionaire Tells Obama: 'Raise My Taxes, Please
Please Raise My Taxes Says This Millionaire - CNBC.com
'Raise my taxes,' town hall attendee tells Obama - Los Angeles Times
Wealthy Man Asks Obama 'Please Raise My Taxes' - ABC News
Question to Obama: "Would you please raise my taxes?" - CBS News
'Would you please raise my taxes?' | Nealz Nuze | www.wsbradio.com
Former Googler Asks Obama: Please Raise My Taxes! - Forbes
Buffett: I beg you to raise my taxes - Politico Staff - POLITICO.com
Raise My Taxes, Mr. President! - The Daily Beast
Daily Kos: So, I voted to raise my taxes * photo diary *
Rich man to Obama: 'Please raise my taxes' - USA Today
'Raise My Taxes,' Town-Hall Participant Tells Obama -- VIDEO
Dow Chemical chief: Raise my taxes too - Nov. 18, 2011 - CNN Money
Warren Buffett: Please, Raise My Taxes : The Two-Way : NPR
Audience Member Asks Obama: 'Would You Please Raise My Taxes
Tell President Obama: Don't Raise My Taxes | Heritage Action for
15000 Illinois Protesters Chant "Raise My Taxes" - Mish's Global
Jay-Z says President Obama can raise taxes as Congress debates
A millionaire for higher taxes - Washington Post
Else why would all the wealthy people who are in congress ever pass taxes like that?
Ummmm..... how about because their job is to help the nation, help the economy, benefit the American people?
Oh, I'm sorry, I'm living in a fantasy land where politicians make some attempt to do their jobs and strengthen the country. Better than living in some fantasy land where cutting total taxes and cutting the top rate from 70% to 30-odd percent is "very high taxes", and where ideology is more important than economic reality, where ideology is more important than deficit and the debt
And evolutionists do not want students to think critically when it comes to evolution.
Cuts both ways, that knife does.
It's the creationist side wielding the knife to cut Critical Thinking skills from education, and the science side fighting to defend and promote critical thinking in education.
A Google on oppose teaching " critical thinking skills" returns the following page of links:
Texas GOP's 2012 Platform Opposes Teaching Of 'Critical Thinking ... ... The Republican Party of Texas' recently adopted 2012 platform contains a plank
Jun 29, 2012
that opposes the teaching of "critical thinking skills" in schools.
talkingpointsmemo.com/.../texas-gop-s-2012-platform-opposes-teaching-of- critical-thinking-skills - 50k - Cached - Similar pages
Texas GOP rejects 'critical thinking' skills. Really. - The Answer ... ... Knowledge-Based Education â" We oppose the teaching of Higher Order ...
Jul 9, 2012
Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and
www.washingtonpost.com/...critical-thinking-skills.../gJQAHNpFXW_blog. html - Similar pages
Texas GOP Declares: "No More Teaching of 'Critical Thinking Skills ... ... The Texas GOP's hidden curriculum against critical thinking and other ... Texas ...
Jul 7, 2012
GOP Declares: "No More Teaching of 'Critical Thinking Skills' in
truth-out.org/.../10144-texas-gop-declares-no-more-teaching-of-critical- thinking-skills-in-texas-public-schools - 62k - Cached - Similar pages
Texas GOP chair explains controversial "critical thinking" platform ... ...
Knowledge-Based Education â" We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS
http://www.kvue.com/news/Texas-GOP-chair-explains-controversial-critical-thinking-platform-language-163615606.html
The Terrifying Texas GOP Platform - Forbes ...
Jul 1, 2012... with the portion that opposes the âoeteaching of Higher Order Thinking Skillsâ and
âoecritical thinking skills.â Although a partial retraction followed,
www.forbes.com/sites/johntharvey/2012/07/.../texas-gop-platform/ - 115k - Cached - Similar pages
Texas GOP Platform opposes teaching "Critical Thinking Skills" ... This kind of stuff I expect from know-nothing Republicans, but opposing the ...
Jun 27, 2012
teaching of critical thinking skills in schools? Who needs critical
www.dailykos.com/.../-Texas-GOP-Platform-to-ban-teaching-Critical- Thinking-Skills-in-schools-The-stupid-IT-BURNS - 158k - Cached - Similar pages
Gail Collins says Texas GOP platform calls for schools to ... - PolitiFact ... We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values ...
Aug 11, 2012
clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply
www.politifact.com/.../gail-collins-says-texas-gop-platform-calls-schools/ - 40k - Cached - Similar pages
No Comment Necessary: Texas GOP's 2012 Platform Opposes ... ... We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values ...
Jun 29, 2012
clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply
takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/.../no-comment-necessary-texas-gops-2012- platform-opposes-teaching-critical-thinking-skills/ - 61k - Cached - Similar pages
Half True: What Politifact Got Wrong About the GOP and Critical ... ..
Aug 18, 2012
There is no such thing as "6000BC".
The world was created 6000 years ago, therefore no dates exist prior to 6:11 PM November 11, 4013 BC.
-
Exactly. Which is why Intelligent Design conclusively proves Christianity and all the other monotheistic religions false.
Only a committee would make specifications for a sewer line discharging right through the middle of a reproductive/recreational area.
-
Foxnews has immediately offered you a job
Screw that, no way in hell I'd take a job working for the Liberal Mainstream Media.
-
Obama's Social Security Number begins 042, a which is only issued to Connecticut residents.
This Social Security Number was issued in the late 1970's.
Lyme Disease was first identified in Connecticut in.... you guess it... the late 1970's.
Coincidence? I THINK NOT!
Obviously Obama created Lyme Disease in a lab in the 1970's, as part of his plan to manufacture fake evidence of evolution, to turn Americans away from God, to ensure he'd be able to usurp the Presidency of the United States after the new Millennium arrived.
-
The Streisand Effect certainly draws additional attention to something, but attention doesn't necessarily equate to paying-customer. In this case the movie already approaches a saturation level of publicity, and informing people of Orson Scott Card's extremely offensive bigotry certainly can reduce the number of paying customers. Like it or not, a rapidly rising percentage of the population consider anti-gay bigotry to similarly as offensive as anti-black bigotry. Most people rather avoid socializing with or giving money to bigots.
-