Interested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
RTEs Sarah McInerney ? Fianna Fail supporter? Anthony
Joe Duffy is dishonest and untrustworthy Anthony
Robert Watt complaint: Time for decision by SIPO Anthony
RTE in breach of its own editorial principles Anthony
Waiting for SIPO Anthony
Public Inquiry >>
A Blog About Human Rights
UN human rights chief calls for priority action ahead of climate summit Sat Oct 30, 2021 17:18 | Human Rights
5 Year Anniversary Of Kem Ley?s Death Sun Jul 11, 2021 12:34 | Human Rights
Poor Living Conditions for Migrants in Southern Italy Mon Jan 18, 2021 10:14 | Human Rights
Right to Water Mon Aug 03, 2020 19:13 | Human Rights
Human Rights Fri Mar 20, 2020 16:33 | Human Rights
Human Rights in Ireland >>
Watch: Government Minister Admits Covid Vaccines Did Not Prevent Transmission Fri May 03, 2024 15:00 | Will Jones
Watch a Government Minister admit to Dan Hannan that the Covid vaccines did not prevent transmission, prompting Hannan to ask: "So why the hell did we force them on to young people? Why did we insist on vaccine passports?"
The post Watch: Government Minister Admits Covid Vaccines Did Not Prevent Transmission appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
As the World Takes Off, Net Zero Britain Stays Grounded Fri May 03, 2024 13:00 | David Craig
All around the world airports are being built and enlarged in countries which appear to realise the 'climate crisis' is just a load of nonsense. But not in poor, gullible Britain.
The post As the World Takes Off, Net Zero Britain Stays Grounded appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Reform Might be About to Wipe Out the Tories Fri May 03, 2024 11:12 | Will Jones
The local election results are as terrible for the Conservatives as feared and thanks to Reform they would have been lucky to have had only a 1997-style wipeout, says veteran pollster John Curtice.
The post Reform Might be About to Wipe Out the Tories appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Are Children Less Like Their Parents Than We Thought? Fri May 03, 2024 09:00 | Noah Carl
The Times recently ran an article with the title ?Children are less like their parents than we thought, study finds?. Yet the study in question found the exact opposite. So what's going on?
The post Are Children Less Like Their Parents Than We Thought? appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
No ?Bioweapon?: Montagnier Thought Coronavirus Was Manmade but Not Very Dangerous Fri May 03, 2024 07:00 | Robert Kogon
HIV discoverer Luc Montagnier deduced from the 'HIV inserts' in the SARS-CoV-2 genome that it was engineered. But he didn't think it could be a 'bioweapon': it just wasn't dangerous enough.
The post No ‘Bioweapon’: Montagnier Thought Coronavirus Was Manmade but Not Very Dangerous appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Lockdown Skeptics >>
Voltaire, international edition
Voltaire, International Newsletter N°85 Fri May 03, 2024 14:25 | en
The Kastner case resurfaces Fri May 03, 2024 14:06 | en
Non-Semite (sic) Khazar Netanyahu calls US anti-genocidal academics "anti-Semite... Fri May 03, 2024 07:13 | en
Paris 2024 and Berlin 1936 in the service of an impossible imperial dream, by Th... Tue Apr 30, 2024 07:07 | en
Georgia and the financing of political organizations from abroad Sat Apr 27, 2024 05:37 | en
Voltaire Network >>
international |
history and heritage |
other press
Tuesday September 07, 2010 17:27
by Paddy Hackett - none
maxanger at live dot ie
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (25 of 25)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25Actually Darwin and Wallace both arrived at the idea of "natural selection" after reading an economics book by a laissez faire economist named Malthus. The noted Christian apologist Bertrand Russell noted that Natural selection, "...is Victorian economics introduced into the natural world." (paraphrase). In short Darwinism is free market economic theory entered into the biological world. Perhaps one reason Darwinism sounds so right upon first being exposed to it is because, we have been conditioned to embrace free market economics?
They even have term for it, Social Darwinism, and it is recognised as one of the facets of fascistic programs. The modern euphemism is 'meritocracy'.
Basically dog-eat-dog. Hence the self-affirmation of 'Because I'm worth it'. Madison Avenue retain their cutting edge mastery.
Paddy's terminology is very broad and open to myriad interpretations on many of his terms, not least how to define 'human'.
I dont think being bipedal or language-using mammals is sufficient. Nor are we just the product of the Stone Age. We are evolving all the time, it aint a done deal. Nature AND nurture(or culture, in its broadest sense), Paddy.
Human Race is a good term. Some never cross the finishing line, they retain their simian nature, no matter what their opportunities for development, they defining such a concept as dependent on how many bananas(well, ingots) you can accummulate. And it dont finish til the final whistle, as you can slip from being quite human, in the best sense, to the bestiality of of Camp Commandant, as is constantly proven on all sides.
As a result you get such wonders of the world as the European savages who pillaged and murdered their way west before turning back east for the present festival of carnage(look up the derivation of carnival)designating the great civilisations they torched as being the savages.
And we can escape some of the limitations nature imposes. We can transcend them, as the likes of Christy Brown prove regularly.
For us joe soaps.
But not to any respectable astro-physicist. At least try to do what you claim on your shingle, or adopt no pretentious titles for the sake of impression.
Science is Science Opus.
Nothing to do with political claptrap of any sort.
An apple falls on your head whether you are Fianna Fail of Fine Gael.
Am I realy writing this in 21st Century Ireland ??
..and is a method of examining physical phenomena, a branch of knowledge(Scio, Latin, 'to know').
It is practised by humans, people, or as the Greeks had it, the 'polis'(no not the Glaswegian with the blue light flashing).
People are political, science exists in a political world. Science becomes politicised. Look no further than the discrepancy between prioritising scientific research budgets to suit corporate rather than social and democratically decided ends, often resulting in mega-billions going to arms programs where a fraction of the same investment could provide clean water and adequate nutrition and education to the billion neglected and needing them.
Thats science driven by political(imperial/corporate/profit ) rather than objective/democratic ends. At its extreme it produces its Mengeles;but usually just the average apolitical, apathetic, indifference to outside considerations,which can lead to the usual obedient service to whatever regime pays the food and rent bills. Not unlike the pigeon pecking the food release button, because thats how its been conditioned.
Any practising scientist knows his world is hemmed in by political forces, from the local politics of the lab, back through the jockeying for recognition and publication to secure funding.
Being able to spell the word and wave it around does not make you a practitioner.
As the writer (and also scientist ) C.P.Snow correctly pointed out in 1959:
"Writers and artist operate on an altogether inferior intellectual plane to scientists.".
Thats a 'scientific' observation, no doubt.
Its definitive subjectivity indicates otherwise.
Shame about your hypothesis.
Writers operate on what they have experienced , not what they have imagined !
The Latter is for the ' arty farty ' .
There are writers and writers.Just as there are scientists and scientists. The good practitioners practise both, and recognise that science requires imagination(Einstein claimed it, imagination, to be '.. MORE important than knowledge'). The faculties are not discrete, but interact and compliment each other in a balance.
i dont know what Einstein was smokin' opus ,when he rote what he rit , but as you are an
ardent fan of oul al you must know of course that the aforementioned oul al is' hovis' , as in
brown bread . dont forget to put an x for herr kenny while your at it :-)
So I'll pass it by. Did you grow it yourself ?
My point was about false dichotomies. If you missed it look closer. Al is incidental, its about the actuality of scientific progress which requires more than a monocular reductionist squint.
Herr Kenny??
Is that herr Pat or her Edna?
There you go opus , blindin a Dublin 4'r with science, yet again .
how i , a mere product of Jameson 12 , am supposed to keep abrest of your good self
i will never know , on a' bud lighter ' note i pray you will vote for Herr Endaderoad Kenny as
he is going mad to ' get us all back to work ' , i hate those 4 letter words dont you ?
but at least he tries to move forward in an attempt to bankrupt the third world country , with an
o included , to which meehall martin will rue the bloody day he ever introduced the no smokin
ban which has left the boozers with no craic whatsover . am off out now to drink and be merry
and smoke my brains out , whats left of them , keep well .
Try coming up with a better description of gravity than Einstein's General Theory of Relativity
Hitler was so insensed that a Jew should come up with such brilliance that he instructed 100 of the best Aryan writers to write the book:
"100 Authers against Einstein".
Read all about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_Authors_Against_Einste...stein
The Jew Einstein replied:
"If I were wrong then only one author would have been enough".
Seeing as Darwin is the first name in the title of the thread title it is instructive to read what Darwin said about British Universities:
"You can get a first class honours degree in arts in a British university without ever having heard that the earth orbits the sun."
You can get a PhD in physics without knowing how Dante relates to Joyce. Horses and courses. Different fields of human knowledge. If we return to the original idea of university, the name implies a universal foundation in human knowledge, so ideally an overview of all fields, before specialisation.
We living people do not need dead men to think for us.
.
Any scientist knows science is a collaborative project, punctuated by individual solitary(relative)inputs.
The thoughts, discoveries, and inventions of the dead are the foundation we think as we do as a result of. Right back to the first taming of fire.
It is the dead created the language and mathemathics science builds with, through and upon.
Such arrogance is a recipe for bad science, which also exists. It is, after all, a human practise.
I was refering to " new ideas" Opus.
Science, Technologyand Mathematics do not "Read the Words of a Prophet." from "Fado-Fado".
The very opposite is true.
Agree with that.
The "prophets " Karl Marx and Nietsche were two jesters, in scientific terms.
History will not remember them kindly.
(The creater of anarchism, Bakunin, included as well.)
Science does not bother to remember any of them at all.
..is an abstraction. to refer to it as 'dead' seems more akin to poetic than scientific speculation.
Science, technology and mathematics do not 'read'. Your anthropomorphism is getting the better of your 'scientific' judgement.
"Dead seems more akin to poetic than scientific speculation."
I ran over a hedgehog yesterday Opus.
It looked dead to me.
Poet that I am.
Indicates the degree of your scientific dependability. Stick to the poesy. I'll warn Heaney.Ciao.
Nobody reads Heaney.
(Except Desmond Fennell who regards Heaney as a not -poet.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Fennell_%28Irish_w...er%29
"Whatever You Say, Say Nothing: Why Seamus Heaney Is No.1 (1991)".
I couldn't care less about either of them.
They are from the Arts world therefore boring.
the only thing scientific about scientist/pete/physicist/astronomer is his methodical approach to the destruction and derailing of every thread on this site that he posts on with pointless navel gazing guff. Ignore him opus
"His methodical approach to the destruction and derailing of every thread."
All machines are tested to destruction.
That is how you find out which space shuttle will lift off the ground.
Doesn't always work.