Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: moviePig Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: OT: It ain't science, Rocket... Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 22:28:33 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 78 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: nobody@nowhere.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2025 04:28:33 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e738ae90ce9f9ec68c81d3505126dd20"; logging-data="1515849"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/XWkWpRha9t1/yeJUVwpCwZDJSBEu5d2k=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:O2tacCs5i6+Acf2hAo/7tDmpjrI= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US On 4/25/2025 9:10 PM, Rhino wrote: > On 2025-04-25 6:19 PM, moviePig wrote: >> On 4/25/2025 5:57 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>> On Apr 25, 2025 at 2:39:44 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 4/25/2025 4:05 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>   On Apr 25, 2025 at 1:00:01 PM PDT, "moviePig" >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>   "Democratic-led congressional committees and left-wing think tanks >>>>>>   [were] more likely to cite research papers than their right-wing >>>>>>   counterparts." >>>>>> >>>>>>   "There are striking differences in amount, content and character >>>>>> of the >>>>>>   science cited by partisan policymakers ..." >>>>>> >>>>>>   "Left-leaning think tanks were 5 times more likely to cite >>>>>> science than >>>>>>   right-leaning ones." >>>>>   Depends on what they consider science. >>>>>   Remember, this is the crew that told us 6 feet distancing was >>>>> "the science". >>>>>   That closing outdoor geography, like beaches and oceans was >>>>> necessary to >>>>>   combat the Wuhan Flu, that you couldn't get it if you were >>>>> vaccinated, and >>>>>   that men can become pregnant and there are 87 genders (and >>>>> counting). >>>>>   This is what the Left considers "the science", so saying they're >>>>> more likely >>>>>   to cite science isn't really the own you think it is. >>>> >>>> Who is "the crew"?  Nature magazine?  I'm largely unfamiliar with them. >>>> >>>> Meanwhile, anyone with a basic grasp of science will know that "six >>>> feet' is a threshold for an arbitrary likelihood of contagion, and >>>> not a >>>> magic border that germs dare not cross. >>> >>> Not the point. We were told it was "the science" and only now, years >>> later, >>> have the officials who told us that admitted that they made it up. They >>> literally just pulled the number out of their asses. >> >> As I illustrated, different people have different degrees of >> understanding about what "It's the science!" actually means.  Public >> announcements, otoh, have to be one-size-fits-all formulations. >> >> >>>> As for this being an "own", what *I* take from it (and I do think it's >>>> credible) is that the Left public is less prone to take things on >>>> faith. >>> >>> If you believe men can get pregnant, faith is all you're taking it on. >> >> Did you know that, with modern aviation, pigs can, in fact, fly? >> >> > Pigs have been able to fly for centuries; it has nothing to do with > modern aviation. Pigs could have been (and maybe were) carried aloft in > hot air balloons in centuries past. Gunpowder is believed to have first > been discovered in China many centuries ago when a pig sty containing > all the ingredients in gunpowder was somehow ignited. (I'm picturing a > Chinese farmer hearing a strange noise from his pig sty one night going > to check it out; since it's dark, he lights a torch so that he can see. > A spark from his torch ignites the gunpowder and KABOOM.) I feel sure > any pigs in the pig sty went flying at that moment. > > But men still can't get pregnant and never have been. (I won't say they > never will because science may find a way to do it someday.) Merely > redefining women as men, calling them "trans-men" and then noting that > these "men" are pregnant is mere sophistry. Can a hermaphrodite get pregnant?