UPS and Intel end support of BSA

[JoeBob]

Sorry Brewmeister,

 

Here's the flippant comment from moosedropper that I could not let pass:

 

'The Republicans trying to throw the bible into preserving the earths's resources is the problem, they try to use it to ignore global warming, and those the republicans have chosen to be on the science committee, have all stated ridiculous things that make them walking jokes.'

 

Can I sell you some popcorn?

[AZMike]

Hitler was a gay atheist who hated the Boy Scouts.

[Brewmeister]

I think moose's view on the Republicans is pretty clear, and the party could give everyone in America ice cream and a pony and it would still suck in his view.

 

Being a pack CC I have lots of popcorn. I'm going with Blast O' Butter and waiting to see what happens next.

[packsaddle]

You know, for some reason I have always thought that Moosetracker was female, not that that matters much. I just like to get SOME things right. Clarification please?

[JoeBob]

I thought "moosetracker" was mother to "Moose the Italian Blacksmith"

 

Did I loose track, er?

[acco40]

When did "science" become political? When scientist started to receive funding from the government?

 

I think it started before the global warming debate. Three Surgeon Generals (Koop, Satcher and Carmona - appointed by Reagan, Clinton and Bush) all criticized politicians (mostly Dubya) for trying to influence science. Carmona, even went public by stating before House committee that public health reports are withheld unless they're filled with praise for the administration. "It was Surgeon General Koop who pointed out and still says today 'Richard, we all have fought these battles, as have our predecessors going back over a century, but we have never seen it as partisan, as vindictive, as mean-spirited as it is today, and you clearly have it worse than any of us had.' "

 

Spending on research on embryonic stem cells, the effects of sex education, space exploration, contraception and global warming became not based on science - but politics. It is sad. Maybe we need a few Merlyn's in elected office?

[AZMike]

"Spending on research on embryonic stem cells, the effects of sex education, space exploration, contraception and global warming became not based on science - but politics. It is sad. Maybe we need ."

 

When has government-funded science ever NOT been political? We're paying for it with money extracted from the taxpayer's pocketbook.

 

NASA Administrator Charles Bolden on Obama's mandate to him on NASA's new focus: "...perhaps foremost, he wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering."

 

Au revoir, manned space program.(This message has been edited by AZMike)

[DigitalScout]

AZMike, you are obviously quite smart and reasonable. But citing Hilter? Really?

 

My wise father, my he rest in peace, said that you know you won the debate when your opponent invokes Hitler in his argument.

 

But I still think you rock.

 

[AZMike]

DigitalScout, you rock too!

 

It was actually a joke based on Brewmeister's earlier post on page 8"

 

"Holy cow, we went from gays to global warming in 8 pages. No mention of Hitler yet though. Where's the popcorn?"

 

(Although at least two of my three statements are true.)

[moosetracker]

Yes, moosetracker is female..

 

Since your science, means you cant believe your lying eyes, I am quite comfortable with my science which is proved out week to week in various countries all over the world..

 

Not sure if Sandy is a 100 year storm (for that area) or not.. If you take each disaster of the world, as a single issue in its own separate vacuum, rather than look at the up-tick of the amount of disasters all over the world as being more often and more serious and more fatal and destructive..

 

Icebergs are thawing, that is a fact.. Don't know if Polar bears will become extinct, I never said they were they are simply currently being affected by it.. Definitely on a decline, but there are other factors besides Global Warming for that.. Polar bears normal hunting and migratory paths are disturbed because of it.. But, they are finding Polar Bears are adapting in order to survive, like eating goose eggs because the melting of the icebergs give them shorter hunting periods for their normal diet of seals. There is also studies that they evolved from the brown bear, so they have the capability to evolve for changing climates.. If all else fails there is always climate controlled environments at a zoo.

 

Here is something, that may sound a little Republican. Although I feel for the victims in all these disasters, with the increase of disasters in the last 10 years, our country is spending way to much paying out disaster relief.. We do need to be front and center to help protect life during the emergency, rebuild the infrastructure of the community, look into ways we can shore up the barrier to protect against future disasters etc.. But at some point in time I think our country does have to draw a line in the sand as to what we will pay out for personal property damage.. Either the people insure against it or they dont, especially those who live near the coastline, or in places known for out of control blazes, earthquakes, tornadoes etc..

 

Once Republicans returns to fiscal conservatism, and throws off this religious social & non-scientific bent, as well as dislike for the majority of the population.. I may consider them viable again. There are some voices that sound reasonable, it is just how long it will take for them to get through to the rest of the base party.

[packsaddle]

I guess I should add something. There is science in the strictest narrowest sense, the actual process. And then there is 'science' in some broader context, which seems to mean many things to many people and is related to the actual process but doesn't necessarily interact well with it. This is one of the difficult contrasts or differences we have to try to convey in an STS course if it's going to achieve one of its goals.

 

Yes, AZMike is correct that any scientific research that is funded by the government is going to have a political component related to source of funding, how much funding, its administration, the reporting, publications, potential renewal, and even down to what are the research goals in the first place. I used to be part of that monstrosity. All of my colleagues (other 'worker bee' scientists) attempted to accept the reality of all of those first components in order to devote our energy to minimizing the influence of politics on the actual scientific research.

I also note that at some level, ALL science is political if it ever is intended to be communicated to others. We just don't think about some scientific research in those terms if it is so irrelevant that no one cares (here I mention the extremely arcane field of taxonomy, at least for obscure taxa that seem to be unimportant outside of phylogenetic schemes).

 

But all that is science in the broader sense. In the strictest and purest sense science, the process, is as indifferent to politics as it is to religion. It simply IS. Individuals may not pursue it in that purest sense and people may interpret results with other agendas in mind. But the actual science is either there or it isn't. If there, it's only assailable by more actual science. Yes, politics can shut off funding or move people around or even write laws to try to stifle its effect - often in vain (and here I think about how legislation couldn't keep up with the advances of molecular biology and such things as cloning).

 

Let's face it. Politicians usually are dim-witted and therefore usually unable to comprehend any level of complexity close to what is modern science (which is how those troglodytes can feel comfortable on the science committee). But politicians DID do something that was either clever or inadvertent. By creating huge publicly-funded programs to promote science, they managed to take control of most OF it. Universities, like corporations, have no mind (and as AZMike noted for corporations, can't masturbate, lol), and administrators are some of the least imaginative people you could ever put into positions designed to stifle ideas. It is no accident that not only are the government research labs shackled to political whims, so are university programs which are constantly bombarded with encouragement to seek government funding from NIH, NSF, EPA, USDA, DOD, etc. And WHY? So administrators who really don't care about science can collect discretionary funds in the form of indirect costs with which they can build more and even bigger and equally useless...what? Administration. It's politics.

If there was EVER a true oxymoron, I would have to pick 'political science'.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[AZMike]

BigBovine: "Being that, outside of Church, Scouting seemed to be an organization that followed along my beliefs. I understand there are different faiths in BSA, and at Woodbadge experienced a non denominational, multireligious non religious ceremony. That was very different and bothered me at first. Then I realized that there were many different types in the group. Even though I didn't like it, I realized I am not in BSA for it's religious services."

 

BigBovine, I've never been to Woodbadge - just out of curiosity, what was that ceremony like and what did you find objectionable about it?

[bigbovine]

If memory serves correctly,

We entered the campfire area Sunday Morning for an "Interfaith Worship Service"

They began with a Call to worship talking about a Scout is Reverant toward God and his religious duties.

 

Then there were several Prayers, Hymns, Poems, from different religions, not just Judeo-Christian Faiths.

 

What got me was the mentioning of God as I know him then using his name in different ways that try to connect him to the other religions. As many well know, most of these religions do not see God the same way as I do or even associate or admit the existence of God. It became a PC service. Don't want to offend anyone you know. Short of animal sacrifice in a Satanic way, I have no problem witnessing other Faiths and the way they worship. I see it as educational. I also would not interupt said services just because I do not follow that religion.

 

I would rather have had each religion represent their own service instead of trying to tie things together that do not belong.

[AZMike]

Huh. Yeah, I think I would rather have an interfaith service, where each faith does its own prayer and explains its own doctrine, or a very basic non-denominational service, than try to wrap us all in the same blanket by claiming a shared set of beliefs or vision of God that may not exist in reality, at other than a very basic level.

 

Do you know if that was part of the Woodbadge curriculum, or something that was done locally?

[bigbovine]

"Do you know if that was part of the Woodbadge curriculum, or something that was done locally? "

 

Not really sure. The only training I have been to were a service like that was done.