Patience Running Thin
I went to the new Catholic parish center tonight , ostensibly to view An Inconvenient Truth again, but more to meet with the program director and to see what kind of turn out they get for such events. I have booked the room for a presentation next month by a woman from Arauca ,Colombia and she doesn't pull any punches when it comes to criticizing US policy and especially the current administration. My comrade wants to do a presentation at the highschool where he works but some in the administration are wondering if they need to present a "counter-point" to maintain a balanced and nuetral position.
Apparently the Catholics were thinking along those same lines because they allowed time tonight for a global -warming "denier" , a fellow who presented his credentials as a scientist (a geologist! wtf?)) then disputed Al Gores claims of impending doom. Im growing , how shall I put this, less patient with these kinds of debates. The 9/11 conspiricy guys, the global warming deniers, the pro-Colombian government faction, they are all losers and I don't have time to fuck with them. I gave the CO2 denier a little heated exchange, but the Catholics got uneasy and I really don't have the energy. Do I have to listen to the alien space ship, stigmata and sasquatch contingent every time I want to talk about justice? Do I give equal time to crop circles and the image of Jesus in a peanut butter sandwich? I don't worship at the alter of empiricism but if factual testimony and peer reviewed studies mean nothing I think we just drove into the swamp.
Labels: alligators, conveyor, Lourdes
posted by troutsky @ 9:38 PM
11 comments
11 Comments:
Darn right.
I hear ya. These people go looking for a platform to "get the truth out."
When I Was a kid my teacher explained this once. If 2+2 is 4, we don't have a vote to decide 2+2 is 5. Sometimes it's just teh right answer regardless what the majority says.
clyamDav, thanks for joining us, I can't remember how i found your blog but I enjoyed it.The other classic thing about the denier was he believes himself to be persecuted.Like so many conservatives, he loves the role of "victim" and compared his position to that of Galileo!And Einstien!
Totally misunderstanding the current ambient background, he fails to see he has sided with the corporate and political powers who favor the status quo.He thinks he's a rebel, going so far as to say other deniers have recieved death threats for their heretical views.Classic.
It is quite clear from your rhetoric what would happen to people that disagree with you should you ever access power. You have an extrordinary compassion for "the people," as an abstract, and utter contempt for people as human beings; all these non-entities who lack your crystalline vision, and who would resist your re-education, would be exterminated in a heart beat. Your omniscience is breathtaking, and deserves to be rewarded with omnipotence. Amazing what one can learn from reading howard zinn.
lhold on there, anonymous,thats an amazing leap, grouping me with PolPot because Im often critical of peoples behavior.Im the first to admit I like "the people" in the abstract more than actual individuals,ive written about it here quite a bit.But i am more interested in transformation through emancipation than I am in extermination.
You suffer from "jingo-itis" and seem to only think in slogans.All leftists are not Stalin.There are probably people you do not care for (me ,for example) but you also hope to transform us to your way of thinking.That is the discourse, but it goes smoother without the hyperbole.
Anon,
Troutsky does not seek power over others. Far from it! You have indeed made a tremendous leap in assuming you know him or others like him.
He also does not seek to educate others, but learn "with" them. Hence, this blog! He definitely does not assume to have a "crystalline vision" as he has demonstrated throughout his blog. He would never assume one existed since his work doesn't deal in the metaphysical.
Am I wrong to assume you do not wish to be carelessly lumped together with other right-wing nuts (viz. Hitler, Mussolini)just because you disagree with Howard Zinn? Then please join in a rational dialogue without all the hyperbole. Argue the merits or flaws of Zinn, Troutsky...I'm sure they'll respond without name-calling.
I don't worship at the alter of empiricism but if factual testimony and peer reviewed studies mean nothing I think we just drove into the swamp.
Then we just drove into the swamp. Scientists are humans too. I have no problem with scientifically proven facts, but when a few scientists who agree that the earth is warming because of the bloody humans, it doesn't make it so.
Save your ire and exasperation for those who truly deny facts. It'll be better for your blood pressure.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Wiser,
I can't understand how you can consider the largest scientific consensus in history "a few scientists."
Exasperated and ired!
Che Bob,
There are two problems I in regards to global warming.
First, although the mathematical model predicts disaster, it is only a model, and could be quite wrong. Scientists in the 60's thought we were heading for another ice age but they were wrong because their model was wrong. And with all due respect, I can hardly take seriously a sentence which contains within it both "reputable" and "UN".
Second, the warming may be caused by factors outside of our control. Nearby planets have also exhibited warming, and we can't blame the internal combustion engine for the increase in temperatures on, say Venus. Solar activity is the elephant in the living room on this one. Until the "scientists" offer an explanation for said elephant, I'll retain my skepticism.
Post a Comment
<< Home