19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!)

by **Bucky** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 07:50:50

huckabee stole my joke

moodoo must hate me too

by **pacino** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 08:03:43

Rick Santorum defies the head of the Holy See and one true successor to Saint Peter

Seeing that it is expected by many that Pope Francis will release an encyclical on climate change, Santorum says he disagrees with what he expects to hear in it. "The Church has gotten it wrong a few times on science, and I think we're probably better off leaving science to the scientists and focus on what we're really good on, which is theology and morality. When we get involved with political and controversial scientific theories, then I think the church is probably not as forceful and credible."

FWIW, the Pope has an MA in Chemistry. Also, I sure hope the church stays out of controversial topics!

by **Soren** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 08:11:58

pacino wrote:Rick Santorum defies the head of the Holy See and one true successor to Saint Peter
Seeing that it is expected by many that Pope Francis will release an encyclical on climate change, Santorum says he disagrees with what he expects to hear in it. "The Church has gotten it wrong a few times on science, and I think we're probably better off leaving science to the scientists and focus on what we're really good on, which is theology and morality. When we get involved with political and controversial scientific theories, then I think the church is probably not as forceful and credible."

FWIW, the Pope has an MA in Chemistry. Also, I sure hope the church stays out of controversial topics!

this hurts to read so bad considering the efforts the GOP has made to change the narrative on climate change IRT scientific consensus.

by **PhillieMooDo** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 11:38:58

Bucky wrote:huckabee stole my joke

moodoo must hate me too

Nah, man - you'd say it as a joke (and a bad one, but that's another discussion) - he's saying it to rally his ignorant base.

by **SK790** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 12:18:44

Good to see the Republican candidates getting a jump on saying incredibly stupid shit.

by **Phan In Phlorida** » Wed Jun 03, 2015 14:00:33

swishnicholson wrote:Mike Huckabee declares he wishes he had identified as female early in his life.

Pretty brave of him, in my opinion.

by **jerseyhoya** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 01:13:15

The Population Bomb, Then and Now

Is always fun to look back on failed doom saying from the pessimist, econutters on the left. The video is wild, with the seriousness this was taken by people like Cronkite and Johnny Carson. And the guy is still alive and still thinks he's right.

Human ingenuity is a hell of a thing.

by **jerseyhoya** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 01:33:35

The Agency

More NYT web traffic from BSG on an interesting NYT Mag story about the professionalization of Russian trolls online. Some neat anecdotes with them trying to set the author of the piece up with Nazi compatriots and whatnot.

by **drsmooth** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 07:18:04

jerseyhoya wrote:The Population Bomb, Then and Now

Is always fun to look back on failed doom saying from the pessimist, econutters on the left. The video is wild, with the seriousness this was taken by people like Cronkite and Johnny Carson.
.

Henry "Bombastic" Bushkin, Carson's lawyer, described Carson as an Eisenhower Republican. Probably an in-joke

Of course as everyone knows the power of redistributionist policies implemented by enlightened liberal democracies has exceeded that of the red in tooth and claw proto-free market ideologies favored by ecosquanderers on the right, fortifying the economic condition of the less economically fortunate and enabling them to live more ordered, less chaotic, more plannable, less 'populous' lives.

Meanwhile autocratic, theologically riven regimes in benighted regions of the planet face, among other challenges, exploding populations they are incapable of feeding or effectively suppressing.

Oh, and Reverend Malthus, who was never seen to wear Birkenstocks himself, clung to the notion that a key to avoiding overpopulation's scourge in England was to end the Poor Laws

by **Soren** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 08:07:15

jerseyhoya wrote:The Population Bomb, Then and Now

Is always fun to look back on failed doom saying from the pessimist, econutters on the left. The video is wild, with the seriousness this was taken by people like Cronkite and Johnny Carson. And the guy is still alive and still thinks he's right.

Human ingenuity is a hell of a thing.

Silver had a whole chapter in his book about the population bomb prediction and there was a semi-recent Freakonomics podcast about fertility rates in poor vs rich countries which mentioned that most think the global population will max out at about 9 billion. We're still consuming at a faster rate than the planet can produce though.

by **TomatoPie** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 08:28:10

Soren wrote: We're still consuming at a faster rate than the planet can produce though.

That's where every such calculation, beginning with Malthus, goes off track. Technology is not static. If we tried to feed the current world population by farming with ox-drawn plows, it would be a struggle.

by **Soren** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 08:31:47

TomatoPie wrote:
Soren wrote: We're still consuming at a faster rate than the planet can produce though.

That's where every such calculation, beginning with Malthus, goes off track. Technology is not static. If we tried to feed the current world population by farming with ox-drawn plows, it would be a struggle.

Well, yea obviously but that's a hell of a gamble to make don't you think?

by **The Crimson Cyclone** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 08:43:15

I'm less concerned with fertility rates than the aging population

I really think we're at some huge leaps in life extension in the next 50 years

by **TomatoPie** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 08:44:56

Soren wrote:
TomatoPie wrote:
Soren wrote: We're still consuming at a faster rate than the planet can produce though.

That's where every such calculation, beginning with Malthus, goes off track. Technology is not static. If we tried to feed the current world population by farming with ox-drawn plows, it would be a struggle.

Well, yea obviously but that's a hell of a gamble to make don't you think?

Well - every doomsday prediction thus far has been laughably wrong. Kinda makes me skeptical about the current chicken littles.

by **swishnicholson** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 08:45:41

jerseyhoya wrote:The Population Bomb, Then and Now

Is always fun to look back on failed doom saying from the pessimist, econutters on the left. The video is wild, with the seriousness this was taken by people like Cronkite and Johnny Carson. And the guy is still alive and still thinks he's right.

Human ingenuity is a hell of a thing.

Scariest quote was from Richard Nixon on cities.

by **pacino** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 08:59:14

swishnicholson wrote:
jerseyhoya wrote:The Population Bomb, Then and Now

Is always fun to look back on failed doom saying from the pessimist, econutters on the left. The video is wild, with the seriousness this was taken by people like Cronkite and Johnny Carson. And the guy is still alive and still thinks he's right.

Human ingenuity is a hell of a thing.

Scariest quote was from Richard Nixon on cities.

another econutter

by **Soren** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 09:02:19

TomatoPie wrote:
Soren wrote:
TomatoPie wrote:
Soren wrote: We're still consuming at a faster rate than the planet can produce though.

That's where every such calculation, beginning with Malthus, goes off track. Technology is not static. If we tried to feed the current world population by farming with ox-drawn plows, it would be a struggle.

Well, yea obviously but that's a hell of a gamble to make don't you think?

Well - every doomsday prediction thus far has been laughably wrong. Kinda makes me skeptical about the current chicken littles.

That doesn't really answer my question though.

Your priors are
1)Doomsday predictions have been and likely will continue to be "laughably wrong."
2) "chicken littles" are worth of skepticism (any scientist would agree up to a point)
3) The rate of invention/innovation is faster than the rate at which we are depleting resources

Are you will to make the bet that we don't need to take action to either reduce consumption or invest heavily in renewable energy sources because we'll figure it out?

by **Woody** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 09:44:59

I have an idea why don't we reduce consumption now AND create new technologies that allow us consume more efficiently in the future

by **Soren** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 09:51:22

Woody wrote:I have an idea why don't we reduce consumption now AND create new technologies that allow us consume more efficiently in the future

Well, I mean yea but it's not that easy.

by **Woody** » Thu Jun 04, 2015 09:57:42

the free market will make it happen, it is known

Archived

19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!)

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!

Re: 19 Republican primary candidates and counting (politics!