|
Post by devilschaplain2 on Apr 7, 2009 19:30:32 GMT -5
But it's Italy so they were prolly all Catholics, and you know how Catholics just don't really know what's going on, and...stuff...and, well...you know they worship Mary, and they just don't get the science! So there! Totally...because Catholics aren't Christians, they're really Pagans in disguise.... ;D
|
|
|
Post by ausador on Apr 7, 2009 21:03:17 GMT -5
Well lets see...science was great during WWII intelligence and research were hailed because they created new weapons and defenses. Afterwords however it was distrusted again. It was one thing to work in applied science and design products and gadgets, but those "eggheads" in their ivory towers working on pure science were just "long haired dreamers". Even after the soviets got the A-bomb science was still ridiculed. No way had the stupid godless communists been able to come up with it on thier own. (admittedly they didn't do it completely by themselves)
The only result were the witch hunts for spies and communists while people went right on ignoreing basic research. The army continued to play with their captured V-2 rockets from Germany without any real progress or funding. That all changed when Sputnik was launched, suddenly those godless communists had something we didn't. After the hysteria and frantic bomb shelter digging slowed a bit the people realized we needed science again.
Politicians of every stripe proclaimed the need for urgent emphasis on science in schools, for more math, for more engineers. The space race was launched and science was suddenly respectable and encouraged. Kennedy proclaimed we would go to the moon within the decade and we did. It was a great time for science and even the fundies cheered when Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon. Then the fundies remembered that they distrusted science, we beat the communists to the moon, why do more?, it was repetitive and boring.
Ever since probably about 1973 the public regard for and opinion of science has been slideing. Once again we are back to "long hairs in their ivory towers working on useless estorics" mindset. Worse a growing percentage of the population is either distrustful or actively hostile to science. I suppose until something comes along that makes us 'need' them again the disregard of basic science will continue.
Really the people at R.R. are just a bit more outspoken about their feelings towards science than most of the population. Polling shows that many feel this way unfortunatly, when it directly helps them they are all for it, otherwise it is either ignored or made fun of.
|
|
|
Post by ostravan on Apr 7, 2009 23:42:33 GMT -5
Well lets see...science was great during WWII intelligence and research were hailed because they created new weapons and defenses. Afterwords however it was distrusted again. It was one thing to work in applied science and design products and gadgets, but those "eggheads" in their ivory towers working on pure science were just "long haired dreamers". Even after the soviets got the A-bomb science was still ridiculed. No way had the stupid godless communists been able to come up with it on thier own. (admittedly they didn't do it completely by themselves) The only result were the witch hunts for spies and communists while people went right on ignoreing basic research. The army continued to play with their captured V-2 rockets from Germany without any real progress or funding. That all changed when Sputnik was launched, suddenly those godless communists had something we didn't. After the hysteria and frantic bomb shelter digging slowed a bit the people realized we needed science again. Politicians of every stripe proclaimed the need for urgent emphasis on science in schools, for more math, for more engineers. The space race was launched and science was suddenly respectable and encouraged. Kennedy proclaimed we would go to the moon within the decade and we did. It was a great time for science and even the fundies cheered when Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon. Then the fundies remembered that they distrusted science, we beat the communists to the moon, why do more?, it was repetitive and boring. Ever since probably about 1973 the public regard for and opinion of science has been slideing. Once again we are back to "long hairs in their ivory towers working on useless estorics" mindset. Worse a growing percentage of the population is either distrustful or actively hostile to science. I suppose until something comes along that makes us 'need' them again the disregard of basic science will continue. Really the people at R.R. are just a bit more outspoken about their feelings towards science than most of the population. Polling shows that many feel this way unfortunatly, when it directly helps them they are all for it, otherwise it is either ignored or made fun of. You don't have to look much further than the "Mad Scientist" scenario depicted in many films. This was (and still is) a picture promoted by various factions of the "faithful" to demonise the unbelieving scientist. The latest waste of bandwidth (such as the "Left Behind" series and the "2012" crap) shows the all-knowing faithful and the confused scientists running round like headless chickens, only to convert in the end - many times too late. The bullshit that christianity is the religion of peace, when if fact it is a religion that was invented to keep the Roman Empire going, has been conversion at the point of the sword. On average 1630 innocent people have been slaughtered to enforce this mickey-mouse collection of badly translated babylonian bed-time stories - unfortunately this 1630 is on a daily basis for the last 1600 years.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Apr 8, 2009 0:01:35 GMT -5
The mad scientist is supposed to be the bad guy? Then why am I rooting for him? Come to think about it, why is it always him?
|
|
|
Post by szaleniec on Apr 8, 2009 0:09:53 GMT -5
Come to think about it, why is it always him? I think I have seen female mad scientists, but damned if I can think of an example (other than from webcomics, which aren't a mainstream medium) off the top of my head.
|
|
|
Post by Tiger on Apr 8, 2009 11:12:19 GMT -5
Come to think about it, why is it always him? I think I have seen female mad scientists, but damned if I can think of an example (other than from webcomics, which aren't a mainstream medium) off the top of my head. Girl Genius? It's also a print comic, so a bit more mainstream.
|
|
|
Post by szaleniec on Apr 8, 2009 11:32:51 GMT -5
Girl Genius? It's also a print comic, so a bit more mainstream. Was thinking of it as a webcomic because that's the format I read it in - forgot it started out in print. Fair point.
|
|
|
Post by peanutfan on Apr 8, 2009 12:46:52 GMT -5
The mad scientist is supposed to be the bad guy? Then why am I rooting for him? Come to think about it, why is it always him? They aren't ALWAYS the bad guy. Look at Emmit Brown in the "Back to the Future" trilogy. What I hate is when science fiction promotes religious misconceptions. Two examples that spring most easily to mind for me are the original Outer Limits episode "The Sixth Finger", in which a scientist invents a machine that speeds evolution in subjects (for the assumption that evolution has a "goal" other than species survival) and the 4th-season "Star Trek: TNG" episode "First Contact", when alien doctors examining a disguised and injured Riker comment that he's missing "4 ribs* on this side and 5 on this side!", thus promoting the idiocy that men have one fewer rib than women. *I can't remember the word the alien doctors used for that particular bone, but they were referring to what we call the ribcage.
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Apr 8, 2009 12:55:03 GMT -5
The mad scientist is supposed to be the bad guy? Then why am I rooting for him? Come to think about it, why is it always him? They aren't ALWAYS the bad guy. Look at Emmit Brown in the "Back to the Future" trilogy. What I hate is when science fiction promotes religious misconceptions. Two examples that spring most easily to mind for me are the original Outer Limits episode "The Sixth Finger", in which a scientist invents a machine that speeds evolution in subjects (for the assumption that evolution has a "goal" other than species survival) and the 4th-season "Star Trek: TNG" episode "First Contact", when alien doctors examining a disguised and injured Riker comment that he's missing "4 ribs* on this side and 5 on this side!", thus promoting the idiocy that men have one fewer rib than women. *I can't remember the word the alien doctors used for that particular bone, but they were referring to what we call the ribcage. I think the episode was trying to say that the Aliens had an odd number of ribs on one side, not humans.
|
|
|
Post by szaleniec on Apr 8, 2009 14:16:07 GMT -5
What I hate is when science fiction promotes religious misconceptions [...] the original Outer Limits episode "The Sixth Finger", in which a scientist invents a machine that speeds evolution in subjects (for the assumption that evolution has a "goal" other than species survival) In which case don't watch the Voyager episode "Threshold" if you value your sanity. Though that's good advice in any case.
|
|
|
Post by fundierefugee on Apr 8, 2009 14:37:41 GMT -5
What makes any of you think that others should see their hypocrisy when none of you see your own???
|
|
|
Post by rebelliousscot on Apr 8, 2009 14:51:07 GMT -5
What makes any of you think that others should see their hypocrisy when none of you see your own??? Grouping people under one roof is rarely advisable. Let me explain. I'm agnostic and I'd admit when I was a hypocrite, saying that we're all hypocrites is a huge generalization. So far until this post, I wasn't sure about ya, but ringing us all around under this one idea, is inane. Please apologize and to quote the bible 'Let one without sin cast the first stone.'
|
|
|
Post by gotpwnt on Apr 8, 2009 14:54:43 GMT -5
What makes any of you think that others should see their hypocrisy when none of you see your own??? Then by all means, help me see my hypocrisy. Srsly, I'm interested in what you have to say.
|
|
|
Post by peanutfan on Apr 8, 2009 14:55:26 GMT -5
What makes any of you think that others should see their hypocrisy when none of you see your own??? "You hypocrite, why do you speak of the splinter in your neighbor's eye and ignore the plank in your own? First take the plank from your own eye; then you will see clearly to take the splinter from your neighbor's."
|
|
|
Post by crazalus on Apr 8, 2009 14:59:20 GMT -5
What makes any of you think that others should see their hypocrisy when none of you see your own??? Kindly show us this hypocrisy... please. We'll wait....
|
|