Global Warning/Climate Change

[Robert]

You may want to reacquaint yourself with whatever this is that you think "we" know. It turns out (particularly with certain traits most of us would think are negative) that parental behaviour can strongly impact traits that offspring end up having. Maternal obesity causing offspring to be more likely to be obese is a very good example.

Just state your opinion and do not look to correct someone else's.

[MaxPC]

Sky News host James Morrow says those most likely to accuse others of being “science deniers” are often the most guilty of science denial themselves.

[Ken]

Sky News host James Morrow says those most likely to accuse others of being “science deniers” are often the most guilty of science denial themselves.

Well, he most certainly doesn't make the case. He shows a 5 second clip of a senator asking a non-scientific question to a non-scientist who gives a non-scientific answer. And I don't see anyone "loosing it" whatever that means. Furthermore, I don't see anywhere where this person being interviewed is accusing anyone of being a "science denier"

So his argument is garbage. And if that is the best case that a national news commentator can make on national TV with the endless resources at his disposal then it is pretty pathetic.

If he had used someone like Robert Kennedy Jr. he could have made a better case. But it is doubtful that RFK Jr. is a leftist since his campaign is almost entirely backed by Republicans.

[Josh]

If he had used someone like Robert Kennedy Jr. he could have made a better case. But it is doubtful that RFK Jr. is a leftist since his campaign is almost entirely backed by Republicans.

I think RFK Jr's bona fides as a liberal and a Democrat are well established.

[Ken]

If he had used someone like Robert Kennedy Jr. he could have made a better case. But it is doubtful that RFK Jr. is a leftist since his campaign is almost entirely backed by Republicans.

I think RFK Jr's bona fides as a liberal and a Democrat are well established.

Maybe 20 years ago. Here in 2023 his campaign is being backed by Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, Mike Flynn, Alex Jones, Eric Bolling, and Tucker Carlson. Those are not the bona fides of a liberal or Democrat.

Plus his own family (who are actual liberals) finds him cringeworthy.

But if you really think he is a liberal, then he is a good example of a science-denying liberal. I will grant you that. He is a much better example than the pathetic attempt to make the case in the video clip above.

[MaxPC]

I think RFK Jr's bona fides as a liberal and a Democrat are well established.

They are indeed. I found James Morrow making a valid point in his op-ed. The efforts to shout down others with a different point of view; to engage in name-calling when they cannot force their opinions and are losing a debate (with words such as "stupid"; "science-denyers", etc.) shows the lack of developed critical thinking skills extant.

Regarding some of his commentary style he reminds me of William F. Buckley. Buckley was quite enjoyable in his delivery and thoughts, even if I did not agree with every aspect of his opinions. Charles Krauthammer, like William F. Buckley was also highly intelligent as well as logical in his conclusions. Both men brought much to the public discussion arena and both were gentlemen, thoughtful, courteous, and would refuse to be brought into the ugly name-calling that seems to occupy much of the public rhetoric today. I genuinely feel that social media has contributed to this decline.

[Ken]

I found James Morrow making a valid point in his op-ed. The efforts to shout down others with a different point of view; to engage in name-calling when they cannot force their opinions and are losing a debate (with words such as "stupid"; "science-denyers", etc.) shows the lack of developed critical thinking skills extant.

That may have been the point that he *tried* to make. But he completely failed to make it.

His one piece of evidence was a 10 second clip in which Senator Kennedy asked the following question in a Senate hearing:

"Does a biological male have a physical advantage in sport over a biological female?"

to which the person testifying answered "not as a definitive statement"

Which is, of course exactly true. Some sports are indeed based on strength and speed. Some are based on agility and flexibility. In some sports being lighter weight is an advantage. So her answer was perfectly correct. And it isn't even a scientific question. Furthermore he presented zero evidence that this person testifying was accusing anyone at all of "denying science" and nor did he show her "losing it"

If that is the best he can do it is pretty pathetic. In response to the exact question he used, here are some random examples of sports in which biological males do not have a physical advantage:

[Josh]

Generally speaking, men have an advantage over women in sports and in other domains where physical strength, coordination, and spatial reasoning are an advantage.

[Ken]

Generally speaking, men have an advantage over women in sports and in other domains where physical strength, coordination, and spatial reasoning are an advantage.

I don't see anyone denying that on average, men are stronger and faster than women. Or, since we are discussing science, making a SCIENTIFIC argument that men on average are not stronger or faster than women. Perhaps you can find the odd crank who claims such a thing. But I doubt they are making a scientific argument.

But that was not the actual question that Senator Kennedy posed to the witness. He did not ask a scientific question and she answered the question he asked accurately. That was the only piece of evidence that James Morrow used to support his assertion.

[Soloist]

They answered as a lawyer would

If one was to line up all the exceptional men with dexterity and all the exceptional women with dexterity, there might be parity.
The same is not true of strength.

Women tend to be represented in most gymnastics activities associated with horses, there wasn’t anything they could do on horse back that I couldn’t have equally done if we went with the laws of average. I’m a very average person you see.