Some cheesy jokes about this Saturday’s March
By Sam Kazman
Back in February, Yale Computer Science Professor David Gelernter, who may become the next White House science advisor, had this to say about the upcoming March for Science and its organizers: “It’s like this is some sort of Looney Tunes thing. I must be trapped in an alternate reality. They couldn’t possibly be serious.”
But with science marches now scheduled in many cities for this Saturday, timed to coincide with Earth Day, the organizers obviously are serious. Too serious, in our view. Using street protests to handle scientific controversies like climate change is only a few steps above using animal sacrifice.
At times like this, we need some perspective. And we need some cheesy science march jokes.
1. Why did the marcher walk straight into a tree even though he clearly saw it?
Because he refused to let an empirical observation get in his way.
2. Why did hundreds of marchers kiss the feet of one woman?
Because she was a model.
3. Why were so many of the marchers in tears?
Because they were far too sensitive.
4. Why did several hundred science marchers bump into each other at a red light?
Because they refused to recognize that the march had paused.
5. What percentage of the marchers had kale for lunch?
97%.
6. What did the Mexican food vendor say when the marchers complained about his salsa?
“I don’t change my recipes; the salsa is settled.”
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Over 31,000 bona fide scientists say: “No.”
(emphasis mine)
See: http://www.oism.org/pproject/
Further:
(Source: http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html )
‘Bama don’ allow no cheap coal burnin’ ’round here…
‘Bama don’ allow no cheap coal burnin’ ’round here…
But we don’ care what ‘Bama don’ allow,
Gonna burn that cheap coal, anyhow!
‘Bama don’ allow no cheap coal burnin’ ’round here…
‘Da Mann don’ allow no global warmin’ ’round here…
‘Da Mann don’ allow no global warmin’ ’round here…
But we don’ care what ‘da Mann don’ allow,
Gonna warm this ‘ol globe, anyhow!
‘Da Mann don’ allow no global warmin’ ’round here…
‘Rite yer own, ya’ll!
drednicolson Nice adaptation from a great JJ Cale tune. In fact I think I will go listen to it now.
Snowflakes in late April in DC! Unprecedented!
If the weather forecast holds (i.e. climate forecast), the big March in DC is going to get all wet…
Is there a placard for this/
http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2017/04/muslim-phd-candidate-has-flat-earth-thesis-accepted-spent-5-years-with-supervisors-working-on-it-.html
Not even a fundamentalist Christian college would grant a PhD for a thesis claiming that Earth is flat and immobile, with the sun passing over it through doors in the dome of heaven, from which the singing stars hang, because the Bible says so.
Muslim fundamentalism however is apparently exempt from the strictures of non-Islamic science.
You should be pleasantly surprised to learn that, in fact, the Bible has several passages that make reference to the Earth being round. And at least one classical mathematician calculated the circumference of the Earth, which while not correct, was impressively close. By Columbus’ time, Flat Earth was a fringe belief, if it was seriously held at all.
Dr. Ed,
The Bible has no references to the earth being spherical, or even, if properly translated, a flat, round disk. But it does unequivocally refer to the four corners of the earth. Flatness applies even to the New Testament, by which time the pagan Greeks had already measured earth’s circumference.
The ancient Greeks, unlike biblical authors, did indeed know that the earth was spherical. And Eratosthenes (~276 to 194 BC) did come up with a pretty good estimation of the size of the earth.
Europeans did however know long before Columbus that the earth is a sphere. Early Church Fathers insisted on a flat earth, because of the Bible, but by AD 400 Augustine was arguing against a literal interpretation of the Bible if it kept educated pagans from converting.
In the Middle Ages, the Church accepted Ptolemy’s geocentric model, since it at least agreed with biblical passages in which the sun moves but earth stands still. The model had concentric spheres, including a ball-shaped earth. Iberian and other European mariners could see the curvature of the earth, as for instance in the appearance of a ship’s mast before its hull.
Contrary to Washington Irving’s fantasy, Spanish scholars’ problem with Columbus’ proposal was not over the shape of the earth but its size. He imagined that Asia extended much farther east than it does and that earth was smaller than estimated by Eratosthenes. If the Americas hadn’t been in the way, he would have had to turn back or run out of water. His crew was getting mutinous not from fear of falling off the edge of a flat earth, but because the winds blew so steadily from the east that they worried about being able to get back home. But Columbus knew they blew steadily from the west at a higher latitude.
Dr. Ed,
My prior reply to you was lost in cyberspace.
Nowhere in the Bible is earth anything but flat. That includes even the New Testament. Being round, as in a flat disk, isn’t supported by a good translation. The four corners of the earth however are. The earth is not a sphere in the Bible. At best it’s shaped like a round plate, but that’s based upon a faulty translation of the word usually rendered in the KJV “circuit”, but in Job better as “edge”. Nowhere is it described by the Hebrew word for “ball”.
Nor was a sphere to Early Church Fathers, who insisted, rightly, that the Bible clearly shows the earth to be flat. However, by AD 400, Augustine argues that a literal interpretation of the Bible should be rejected, since it cost the Church possible adherents among the educated. Thereafter, the Church adopted the geocentric Ptolemaic system, which a spherical but immobile earth at the center of the universe. At least that allowed keeping the sun moving over the earth, as in the Bible.
The ancient pagan Greeks, by contrast, did know that earth is sphere. Aristotle cites evidence. And, as you mention, Eratosthenes measured earth with some accuracy in Hellenistic Alexandria, centuries before the New Testament.
The Medieval Church therefore accepted that earth is a globe, motionless at the center of a universe of nested spheres, which make music. So too did mariners, who could see the curvature of the earth because a ship’s mast appears on the horizon before its hull. Contrary to Washington Irving’s fantasy, the issue which Spanish scholars had with his proposal was not the shape of the earth, but its size. He argued that Asia extended farther east than it actually does and that earth is smaller than Eratosthemes’ estimate.
Had the Americas not occupied the longitude in which he expected to find Asia, Columbus would have had to turn back, for lack of water. His crew feared not falling off the edge of the earth, but that they couldn’t get back home because the winds blew so steadily from the east. Columbus however knew that at a higher latitude, they blow from the west.
Biblical cosmology:
?w=768
Flat earth, whether rectangular or circular, covered by a solid dome:
More detail:
Well, well, Chimp. Doing your fervent best to shore up your atheistic orthodoxy, I see. Setting aside the issue of how you interpret “חוג” (hvg) to = refer to a “flat circle” when Hebrew scholars seem to prefer “encircle” (as in what may be done with a sphere),
setting aside that issue, I say, for one far more important, I ask you:
What have you done to take care of what will happen to your soul when you die?
We are all going to live forever. Our only choice is: where.
In short: What have you done with Jesus? Is He: Liar — Lunatic — or — Lord? (C. S. Lewis)
Or, like rgbatduke, do you pretend He just never existed at all?
That would make it easy, except for one thing: all the evidence says that He was;
moreover, that he died and that he came back to life.
The weight of the evidence is against you.
The prima facie case, given the evidence, is that Jesus lived and made bold claims, including that he is your personal savior.
The historicity of Jesus is only disputed by quacks. Mainstream historical scholarship holds that Jesus was really here.
Thus, once again, I ask, was Jesus: Liar — Lunatic — or — Lord?
Your answer determines where you will go when you die, a vitally pragmatic question.
For God so loved the world
that he gave his only begotten Son,
that whoever believes in him
should not perish
but have eternal life.
John 3:16
You are resting on belief, either way.
It takes an enormous amount of faith
to keep on believing that God does not exist.
Your posts above show how hard an atheist must work to maintain his or her faith. Someday, when you are weary of that, just stop fighting
and accept Truth.
Someone is after you. How can I tell? Because you are so vigilantly fighting to ward Him off.
Praying for you!
Janice
Janice:
I write to make two comments; one that agrees with one of your stated views and one that disputes another of your stated views.
First my agreement. I strongly support your factual statement saying
The problem of stating such facts in a place like this is that most atheists don’t know what faith is.
Religion is about faith and superstition is about certainty.
One of my duties as a preacher is to give people constructive doubt which makes them challenge their beliefs so they can deepen and grow their faith.
But superstition is about unquestioning belief: only certainty is allowed.
I strongly suspect that superstitious belief in global warming is the motivation for most who will be on the march which this thread is discussing.
Now my disagreement. You say
Sorry, but that does not concur with recorded words of Jesus.
Jesus said, the Sun and the rain fall on the good and the bad alike. Simply, we don’t get what we deserve (I am personally grateful for that). This raises the question of what we do get, and He told us that, too. He said, “In my Father’s house there are many mansions” and “I go to prepare a mansion for you” which I understand to mean that we each get a “mansion” uniquely suited to each of us. And in many ways he said we get the ‘mansion’ which the actions of our faith show we want. For example, He pointed to the different treatments to be expected by a rich religious man who made play of giving to the Temple and a poor widow who tried to hide that she could only afford to give a mite. He told a Roman soldier whose religion was probably pagan that the soldier’s faith had cured his daughter. And He told the parable of the Good Samaritan to demonstrate that God’s love can be provided by and is available to believers in other religions. etc.
So, according to Jesus nobody – not you, not me, not anybody – can decree where anybody will go when they die. God is our judge and he prepares our ‘mansions’. We are saved by Grace through faith alone.
The people intending to march on Saturday want to impose the effects of their superstitious belief on others. They are claiming that which belongs to God alone. We who proclaim the love of the Risen Lord have no right to commit similar sin to that.
Richard
Dear Richard,
Thank you for your affirmation. Thank you, also, for the opportunity your disagreeing with me provides me to clarify my theology. Not I but Jesus, as I read Scripture, said where one goes when one dies (based on the choice one makes about Him during life on earth — I realize that Roman Catholics believe you get further opportunity, but, I am only stating “mere Christianity,” here) when he declared, I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me. (John 14:6). I will never say I know for certain that any given person ultimately is not going to end up in heaven (only where they are at that time very likely going, given their stated belief, at that moment — God alone knows whether or not they have believed, perhaps, as a little child, or will ever come to believe in Jesus as their savior before they die); I will only state the way I believe one must go to get there. I like to think that we will be happily surprised at many of the people we meet up there!
When Jesus or Scripture talk about God’s blessings, such as rain for crops, falling on good and evil people alike, it is (in my reading of Scripture) not referring to their soul’s salvation. The Roman soldier called Jesus “Lord,” thus, he believed in Jesus and, thus, was headed for Heaven, just as was the thief on the cross to whom Jesus said, “Today, you will be with me in Paradise.”
Jesus singled out (as I see it) the widow and her mite to make the point that she, having given “all she had to live on,” gave “more” than the wealthy man who gave a much smaller % of his wealth. It was not about her soul’s salvation that Jesus was talking, but about how much more valuable her gift was in the eyes of God.
Yes, God’s love is supporting and surrounding all of us. That is a separate issue from the salvation of our soul. Confucianism and Buddhism, for instance, have many good tenets — they do not, nevertheless, provide the means to save one’s soul. Such philosophies are based on works which ennoble a person, but, cannot save them. The Tao ends something like this: This is the Tao; I do not know if anyone has ever kept it {completely}. As C. S. Lewis would say, you can go straight from there to Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. Or to the Ephesians: For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith — and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God — not by works, so that no one can boast. (Eph. 2:8, 9)
Even if you believe (as I do not) that there are “many ways to God” (as to salvation of one’s eternal soul), I hope that you would, at least, urge someone like Chimp to believe in Jesus as Pascal did….
To believe Jesus when he boldly stated:
I am the resurrection and the life. He or she who believes in me will live,
even though he or she dies; and whoever lives and believes in me
will never die.
(John 11:25, 26)
Thank you, again, Richard, for honoring me with such a thoughtful reply. We disagree on much, but, having both, you and I, called on Jesus as “Lord and savior,” believing that Jesus died and rose again, I believe that we will one day meet — in heaven. 🙂 And I don’t care if all I get is a heavenly shack — just being there will be good enough for me.
Take care,
Janice
P.S. Please forgive me, if you answer this with more arguments. I don’t think it would be helpful to Chimp to get into an extended dispute about salvation. So, I won’t. I think that what I’ve written is enough (for him to find the Way).
Dear Janice:
You say to me
OK. I accept that request.
I write now because you mention ‘Pascal’s Wager’ and I think the ‘famous last words’ of Voltaire are more amusing.
A Priest leaned over the unbeliever Voltaire who was lying on his deathbed.
The priest said to Voltaire, “Now, in your final moments will you at last renounce the Devil and all his works.”
Voltaire replied, “Now is not the time to be making enemies”, and then he died.
Richard
PS I have used the ‘famous last words’ of Voltaire as a sermon illustration more than once.
richardcourtney wrote here:
“Religion is about faith and superstition is about certainty.”
but religion is about faith precisely because there is no evidence supporting its major claims. no?
The 2017 March for People Who Love Pictures of Science and The Associated Snarky Comments, but Frankly Not the Math Part So Much, Thank You.
A climate marcher walks into a bar with a polar bear sitting on his head.
The bartender says “Can I help you”?
And the bear says “Yeah. Can you get this guy off my @ss” ?
The greatest tragedy of the Modern Era is that we no longer teach stupid people that they are stupid.
TimiBoy HA HA HA +1000 Truer words were never spoken.
They once had a march for science
They all walked with an air of defiance
They said with a rant
You better give us that grant
Cause we all have no other reliance
So why is a march being held in Ottawa?
http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/media-advisory-ottawa-march-for-science-2210939.htm
We are NOT the 51st state.
Perhaps anticipating a series win over Boston.
It’s sponsored by PIPS (Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada), their union. And like any good union, their primary focus is to get more money for their members. In other words, the CAGW gravy train has to keep on a-rollin’.
It seems to me that those who march for science, whatever that means, are people who do not fully understand what science means. Science used to mean truth until political activists started to redefine it by demonstrations, and yes, political marches.
Let science and its truth be evidence based, as it used to be, and not some belief argued by a bunch of activists, whatever their unshakeable convictions.
Evidence lays out the case for truth and can be challenged, moulded and changed until that truth is universally accepted. That is a better basis for science than the politically driven conviction that a trace gas controls our entire climate.
. . . of course there’s always the silly walk for junk-climate-science
Climate scientist have offended many, none more so than the cattle stock with the statements like this one
“Cow ’emissions’ are more damaging to planet than CO2 from cars”
printed in the London’s Independent.
The UK’s cows decided not to take this ‘straw man’ science laying down. All over country in their thousands they are travelling to the capital for an organised counter-march.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/04/15/18/3F47BE5B00000578-4414694-image-m-4_1492277982526.jpg
🙂
It’s a grass roots Moooovement!
Was that cheesy enough? Udderly ridiculous?? OK, OK – I’m probably milking it now…….
Yes, and it doesn’t behoove you.
I’ve felt like that many times while waiting for the commuter train.
ReallySkeptical April 20, 2017 at 10:40 am
I don’t know about the last fifty years, but most of what is published in scientific journals these days is refuted within a couple of years … and that’s not counting the papers that are outright frauds.
Science is currently very ill. It’s far from dead … but it is sick.
w.
sick how?
For instance, how many people are rotting in early graves because they followed the “science” of the Government-mandated “Food Pyramid” which directed everyone to eat “6-11” servings of starch daily? Washed down with “heart-healthy” trans fats and all the sugar they wanted?
“Sick”. Absolutely. Here’s an example of what I see regularly with astronomy papers.
https://scute1133site.wordpress.com/2016/11/28/radec-anomaly-in-67p-spin-axis-precession-papers/
I make a blindingly obvious correction and notify the authors via the official contact email. They don’t reply but more importantly, they don’t retract because the blindingly obvious correction isn’t peer reviewed.
However, about half do reply, usually to politely disagree and a couple have issued corrigenda. I only correct what is beyond any reasonable debate as in the eg above. The fact some do reply doesn’t absolve those who don’t.
“but most of what is published in scientific journals these days is refuted within a couple of years”
So you are saying, go back to an Science issue in the 80s say and that more that half of the papers have been refuted? That is BS. Just show me just one issue of Science or Nature or Cell where that is true.
And is case you didn’t mean the 80s, then any time. Any issue of Nature or Science or Cell where 50% or more of the papers have been refuted. (and BTW, a correction is not refutation)
ReallySkeptical April 20, 2017 at 3:46 pm
Willis Eschenbach is more right then you can imagine. So Whats up Doc? Are carrots really good for the eyes? Raise a paw,,,
Or is it a urban legend, or something more devious, worse than just your mommy getting you to eat your veggies.
I offer the following link.
michael
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/a-wwii-propaganda-campaign-popularized-the-myth-that-carrots-help-you-see-in-the-dark-28812484/
i don’t see the #marchforscience as a “street protest,” but as an expression of some citizens of their concern that science isn’t being understood and appreciated by this administration.
i don’t see why that’s funny or why it has to be made fun of and i sure don’t understand gelernter’s comment. in the u.s. it’s anyone’s right to make fun of anything, but in the ’40s – ’60s conservatives had a great respect for science because they needed it to win the cold war, and i don’t understand where that went.
“i don’t see the #marchforscience as a “street protest,” but as an expression of some citizens of their concern that science isn’t being understood and appreciated by this administration.”
This administration understands the science better than most of the marchers. That’s why they are skeptical that humans are causing the Earth’s climate to change.
“i don’t see why that’s funny or why it has to be made fun of and i sure don’t understand gelernter’s comment. in the u.s. it’s anyone’s right to make fun of anything, but in the ’40s – ’60s conservatives had a great respect for science because they needed it to win the cold war, and i don’t understand where that went.”
Just because skeptics don’t believe that humans are causing the Earth’s climate to change doesn’t mean that skeptics don’t have respect for science.
Here’s the definition of a skeptic:
http://www.climate-resistance.org/2009/02
“On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but – which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts.”
end excerpt
It’s not the skeptics who are unscientific, it is people who claim to know that humans are causing the Earth’s climate to change who are being unscientific because they couldn’t prove their claims if their lives depended on it.
Skeptics just say the CAGW promoters haven’t made their case and they haven’t.
…and if the null hypothesis hasn’t been disproven by now (considering the $Billions spent studying it), I assert it never will be.
Case closed.
Crackers: You obviously don’t know much about the AGW issue.
Here’s a good place to start (free book):
Available here (free): https://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2013/09/24/new-book-climate-models-fail/
— Next, you might set yourself a reading program using WUWT’s “Reference Pages” (top of this page).
— The DVD, “Climate Hu$tle” and the book, Climate Change, the Facts (see upper right margin of this page) would be helpful to you.
— Another good, very readable, book is Jim Steele’s, Landscapes and Cycles: an Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism (available at Amazon)
— The WUWT 10th Anniversary anthology (free pdf download in link at bottom of post) would leave you (be sure to read the comments!) unable to say, “I don’t understand” any longer, for you would be up to speed with the rest of us who regularly read WUWT.
Happy reading/watching! 🙂
Here is the link to the WUWT 10th Anniv. anthology post: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/11/17/wuwt-milestone-10-years/
Crackers,
Advocates of catastrophic man-made climate change have no science on their side. It’s just where their bread is buttered.
The real scientists who helped win the Cold War recognize that the marchers have abandoned the scientific method, so are no longer scientists but trough-feeding bureaucrats sucking the life blood out of America and the world.
who is “advocating” a catastrophe?
how has anyone “abandoned” the scientific method?
if you just want to rant, fine, but you making heavy claims you ought to defend.
cracker, all of those topics have been discussed to death in articles over the last few weeks.
Demanding that the null hypothesis be reversed is by definition, abandoning the scientific method.
Modifying the data to fit the theory is by definition, abandoning the scientific method.
Declaring that you are right because most people agree with you (which isn’t even true), is abandoning the scientific method.
Your failure is in your belief that climate “scientists” are doing science.
That claim is easily refuted. And has been too many times to count.
How do you know Peter Gleick is such a poor dancer?
Because he only has leftist feet.
“Ruairi
April 21, 2017 at 9:41 am · Reply
Their march for ‘science’- a sham,
A junk message like internet spam,
Just another false flag,
By the warmist ragtag,
Wanting taxpayer money for jam.”
http://joannenova.com.au/2017/04/stand-up-and-march-for-science-say-people-who-dont-know-what-science-is/#comment-1907979
What did the blonde science marcher say to her stylist?
I brought my own CO2 for you to make the heat to dry my hair?
The Anthropological Carbon Dioxide Global Warming marching song
(with apologies to Irving Gordon for basing it on his “Delaware” song.)
Now just imagine Perry Como trying to sing it…
Oh, what did UN do, boy,
What did UN do?
What did UN do, boy,
What did UN do?
They outlawed CO2,
They outlawed CO2,
They outlawed CO2,
That’s what they did do.
One, two, three, four!
Oh, what a con-sen-sus
What a con sent.
What a con they sent us?
Was science all alone?
She sent back radiation,
She sent back radiation,
She sent back radiation.
That’s what she did send.
Uno, due, tre, quattro!
Oh why the big decline, Mann
Why the big decline,
Oh why the big decline, Mann
Through a nature trick.
He used his Yamal tree.
He used his Yamal tree,
He used his Yamal tree,
To make a hockey stick.
Un, deux, trois, quatre!
The Medieval Warmth, boy
Where’s that oldtime warmth?
Modeled a new reality,
Remodeled where it’s gone!
Gore’s stuck in a hiatus
Gore’s stuck in a hiatus
Gore’s stuck in a hiatus
An Inconvenient Truth has gone!
Eins, zwei, drei, vier!
Oh, what do grant troughers do, boy.
What do those troughers do?
So what did grant troughers do? Boy.
Do for me and you?
They cost a pretty penny,
They cost a pretty penny,
Cost us pretty penny,
To show haven’t got a clue!
The sun on the meadow is summery warm(er)
The stag in the forest runs free
But gather together to greet the (worse)storm
Tomorrow belongs to me
The branch of the linden is leafy and green(er)
The Rhine gives its gold to the (rising)sea
But somewhere a glory awaits unseen
Tomorrow belongs to me
The babe in his cradle is closing his eyes
The blossom embraces the bee
But soon, says a whisper
“Arise, arise, tomorrow belongs
just a side note “Real Scientists Don’t March” they are in a real job doing real science..
Are you blocking my posts?
If so I’d like to know why.
Tom,
I get tossed into the spam bin on a regular basis. Sometimes, I’m in moderation, “Your comment is awaiting moderation,” and that usually means I used a “bad” word or had too many links in my comment. But, often, I have said nothing “bad” and there is no possible multiple link issue (and no excessive use of blockquoting or bolding or ALL CAPS — at least as far as I could tell). Shrug. About 80% of the time, my comment is fished out of the spam bin (I’m assuming that is where it went) — many times, over 12 hours later. Sometimes, I never see it again.
All that to let you know that you are not alone! I have sometimes wondered if I was on some kind of “watch.” It was never the case.
At least, from your 6:19pm comment, you can see that you are not being blocked based on your identity.
Hang in there,
Janice
No it’s just that I have to keep signing in at every comment and ‘the system’ (whatever it is) never acknowledges a comment. Yes I’m on a reasonably secure non-Windows/Apple/Google system however this site alone (and I comment on other WordPress sites) causes me this problem.
Ho-hum I guess I’ll just have to just post and go, hoping the comments get through…
Q: Why did Peter Gleick not attend the march?
A: Because he went as somebody else.
Worth a read on this general topic:
Union Of Nervous Scientists Hate Facts About Global Warming
http://wmbriggs.com/post/21416/
I may have to attend the local march/rally. A high school junior is one of the leaders. I had hopes this nonsense had not infected the middle of South Dakota. Evidently I am mistaken.
Earth Day 2017. Real Climate Change.
It’s time for the annual Earth Day
to celebrate Lenin’s old birthday.
Less “carbon pollution”
is not the solution.
Eat less! Let it be a “Less Girth Day!
https://lenbilen.com/2017/04/20/earth-day-2017-real-climate-change/