Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Best Science Rant

Eli, being a gentle bunny, has never mastered the art of science ranting. In support of the call for a Science Debate (go there and sign up in support), and Dano's pitiful effort, he offers all (including John S in the pro division) a chance to win the best science rant award. You can enter on the behalf of others. Later in the day we will be posting links from Rabett Run. (UPDATE: Weekend?, Beats shopping for gifts)

The OED defines a rant as a "high-flown, extravagant, or bombastic speech or utterance; a piece of turgid declamation; a tirade," and you can find links to some wonderful examples at Slate in an article on the rant by Daniel Seidel. The NY Subway is famed for its rant inducing properties, but surely in the mix of usual suspects we can find at least one is so discombobulated by the IPCC that he or she could compete?

UPDATE: Remember, this is but the preliminary event. With the coming of the new year, we will have the second annual S. Fred Competition, and Eli is happy to announce that the great man himself will have an entry. God, on the other hand, has not published in 2007 and is not eligible.


Anonymous said...

John S in the pro division"

John A has a stranglehold lock on the pro rant division. Has for some time (since he was born?)

John S is an amateur wannabe ranter. At first, he showed promise (I even thought he might be a John A sock puppet fro a brief moment), but then as he posted a little more, I could see that was clearly not the case. He does not seem convinced by his own rants, which is a pre-requisite to holding the title of "Rant Master", of course.

Now, "Frederic" on the other hand, might have potential to play with the big boy ranters. Like John A before him, he actually seems to whole-heartedly believe the idiotic stuff that he posts.

Anonymous said...

As long as politicians know perfectly well that the best way to gain brownie points is to bring up godful-topics such as faith and that the best way to lose these points is to bring up godless-topics such as science, anything science (including critical thinking) will remain off the debate menu--out in tabooland, if you will...

George Carlin sums it up best about the state of critical thinking in the US:

Anonymous said...

"the best way to lose these points is to bring up godless-topics such as science, anything science (including critical thinking) will remain off the debate menu--out in tabooland, if you will.'

This attitude has its roots with the Puritans. It was the result of an extreme self-selection process.

Most people wanted (understandably) to boot the Puritans out of England because they were such obnoxious, self-righteous, fanatical religious idiots, so they moved to America and re-made America in their own image.

In other words, the Puritans made America into a place where it is taboo to even talk about anything that is not faith-based -- ie, anything that makes the least bit of sense.

The native Americans didn't know how dangerous all this faith-based stuff was and thus never had a chance.

Dano said...

Pitiful effort?!? No one told me I needed to bring my A game because of a contest. Sheesh. No fair.



Anonymous said...

Hey, steady on boyos. Mine are well researched, presented, perfectly modulated diatribes. I have taken on board Dano's comments of the various places that he says beastie species are now travelling to, and have returned. I encourage the vacuous( yes little Stevie Bloom that is you) and have a modicum of sympathy for TCO(where is TCO now). Even Marion Degrado, he who must include a picture of himself to remind all that he is passably human, even if arguments he presents suggest otherwise, yes even dear Marion deserves his place in the Rabett sun.

I argue for various billions of Chinese and Indian fingers, waving in distorted ways in a direction, that would be called, towards us. I argue to calm trouble waters, fearing, that if billions of Chinese and Indians fart at the same time,... , well just pray it doesn't happen.
I end my cogent presentation.


Hank Roberts said...

Insulting, but stupid. I'd give it a D-minus.

Anonymous said...

If you want a rant, I can’t give you one since I only deal in the truth. And the truth that science is hiding from the rest of the world is that many of what the public consider our greatest scientists have been proven wrong time after time. Newton was a stumbling fool, Darwin didn’t really understand anything about DNA (well, OK, it was a bad example since it has been replaced by intelligent design). All of these people present half theories. The things there people produce are never complete and are contaminated by things like data and observations which have no place in the world of science!

And we let the school system continue to teach about these people as if they were right! This can’t go on and I for one have taken to correcting the problems in my daughter’s school library (by-the-way, great tip about flushing the pages down the toilet Eli). But we can’t stop there. I will not rest until science has been corrected and out children are taught what they should be taught!

Now, just so you don’t think I am a fruitcake, as an example of how science should be done, I give you Dr. Ross McKitrick. His work is ensured to never be shown wrong. First he published a book claiming that there is no such thing as a global average temperature, then he published a paper where he claims that non-climatic factors can reduce the global average temperature trend. See, that is science that will stand the test of time and will never be shown wrong!!!

Yelling in the fog

Anonymous said...

But, Yelling, my dear fellow:

String theorists reduce things that do not exist on a regular basis

"In 1994, Edward Witten outlined the following relationship: The Type IIA supergravity (corresponding to the heterotic SO(32) and Type IIA string theories) can be obtained by dimensional reduction from the single unique eleven-dimensional supergravity theory."

So it would appear that McKitrick is in good company.

Marion Delgado said...

hank, john s got distracted.

EITHER rant about the evils of science OR rant about the evils of me authenticating with my Google account (the first choice, by the way) - but don't do BOTH or you will do neither well. Same thing applies to Jc. Sorry. F.

Resubmit it as 2 separate rants and it's about a D each.

Marion Delgado said...

anonymous 1:30 with the proviso that Witten's a brilliant and accomplished physicist who's unfortunately helped lead the cutting edge theoretical physics community astray, but made valuable contributions to the mathematics and analytic techniques of physics.

McKitrick is a deliberate science denier and disseminator of disinformation.

Anonymous said...

I think that the "Hoist by your own petard" rant award should go to Edward Wegman for this famous quote:

“there is a tightly knit group of individuals who passionately believe in their thesis, however, our perception is that this group has a self-reinforcing feedback mechanism and, moreover, the work has been sufficiently politicized that they can hardly reassess their public positions without losing credibility”.

Wegman has just recently shown that he is a member of the evil den of deniers as shown in this letter he signed:

along with approximately 100 other well known deniers.

Anonymous said...

Hank failing me and Marion, he who needs to be bepictured, rant, at least in a small way, against me. But Rabett, no one rants against the Chinese and Indian fingers, and I can well undersatnd why. Blogs, and rants, like this are for the fools like me, Marion, Hank, Dano and sundry others, with more time than sense. Those Chinese and Indians are changing the world and have no time for our nonsense.


C W Magee said...

Is this ranty and sciency enough?

EliRabett said...

John, that was quite the weak rant against the Chinese and Indians. Come lad, you can do better.

Anonymous said...

Hey Rabett, I'm a gentle soul, and as I sell raw materials to the Chinese, no rant against the Chinese/Indians is intended. You don't offend the customer, old son.

Mine was directed, as a troubled mind, to clowns like yourself, bepictured Marion, tablet taking Dano,D-grade Hank and other assorted respondents, who think said Chinese/Indians give a fig for what you all think. Rantees are members of this blog.

BTW Rabett, do you tell your various students that they will be working for the Chinese/Indians in 10 years time.


EliRabett said...

John, given that Eli has had people of every flavor working for him, with him and collaborating, it is not a particularly interesting question. You, OTOH, appear to have issues.

Anonymous said...

Rabett, issues yes, of course. I need to create wealth so that my taxes pay for sponges like you, who tell me I shouldn't have created the wealth in the first place. You never, however, seek to hand back your portion of this wealth. Funny that! It appears, as it passes through the valley of the mice, it takes on a holy sheen. My money doesn't create greenhouse gas, just as I don't fart. Almost as funny as believing you can buy renewable energy from the grids

It should be a particularly interesting question Rabett. So I ask again, as you send your students out into the real world to work for their Chinese/Indian paymasters, and with China/India set to become the worlds biggest emmitters. What do you say to them, what "ride your trusty steed with honour and truth, young sir".

EliRabett said...

John S comes in with a strong, but not winning entry. As typical of our free loaders, John S is moving to Somalia where there are no taxes and no government so he can be free, free.

Sorry John, taxes are the admission fee to civilization and today it costs ~40% of GDP including health and retirement. Think you can do better somewhere else, don't let the door hit you on your way out.

Anonymous said...

Great stuff Rabett, now we're getting somewhere with our rants, with your own contribution of good value. So I add a bit more.
Sponges like you who talk about the cost of joining civilisation are quite good, as your net contribution is negative. You take more than you give. O thats right, your have a high value and contribute mighterly by sitting on your bum in a air conditioned office, taxpayer paid for of course, (and run by renewal energy is it). Well thats what you say, anyway.

Rabett, as teacher, you are not needed. The Chinese/Indians don't need you. They have now and increasingly so in the future, will have their thinkers. They need raw materials and tourist guides when they come to visit. I've picked my job, so when do you and your students become the tourist guides.

Term Papers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Term Papers said...

Man how you do this really hard, but you are too good.