Posts Tagged ‘rant’

Open Letter to the Trump-voting American Public

November 9th, 2016 No comments

Dear America,

What the actual fuck?

I am ashamed. I am appalled. I am stunned. And I am speechless. I am disgusted to be an American today.

America, you stand on the precipice of electing to arguably one of the most powerful jobs on Earth not a qualified (though flawed) woman, but instead a man who, among his other terrible attributes

  1. spouts science-denying rhetoric, including having many times remarked that global warming isn’t a man-made concern, that it is a hoax started by the Chinese, and that vaccines cause autism — for the record: it is, it isn’t, and they don’t;
  2. has failed virtually every business venture in which he’s partaken, including declaring bankruptcy at least four times;
  3. has neither military nor political experience of any significance;
  4. has repeatedly advocated for violence as a solution to disputes including suggesting using nukes on enemies preemptively (!) and encouraging his supporters to punch protesters at his rallies;
  5. has repeatedly insulted and belittled women, handicapped people, LGBTQ people, Muslims, blacks, immigrants and many others;
  6. has been endorsed and held to high esteem by the KKK for his intolerance;
  7. has encouraged his supporters to bully voters at polling locations; and
  8. has staunchly been an opponent of LGBTQ+ and reproductive rights.
Let’s not forget that his VP candidate, Mike Pence, is arguably just as scary or possibly moreso: He has been outspoken against both Roe v. Wade and LGBT equal rights, including advocating for repeal of same-sex marriage; and has even suggested using federal funding to pay for so-called  “gay conversion therapy,” a malicious, wholly unethical, and entirely ineffective practice which is already (thankfully) banned in five states, including California.
Any single one of these should automatically be a red flag for someone of such potentially high office. But Trump (and in some cases Pence) embody all of these failures as a person and more; and with Republicans appearing to be winning the House and Senate majorities too, you’ve effectively removed even the checks and balances that are in the government by design to restrict such power. In addition to this, Trump’s candidacy has effectively legitimized the bigotry, xenophobia, and intolerance that we’ve worked so hard to rid ourselves of over the past two centuries…I guess the thought is that if someone of Trump’s stature can do something so horrible or cruel and get away with it, why can’t John Q. Public too? But this “us versus them” mentality is exactly the sort of fear-mongering that Trump is succeeding in spreading.
Just look at his record: The only person Donald J. Trump cares about is Donald J. Trump. If you thought he could “make America great again” even though virtually every political and economic expert worldwide is telling you otherwise, or that he could fix our economy the way he “fixed” his businesses, you are both mistaken and ill-informed. If you thought he could fix our immigration policies by closing ourselves off from the world and dividing us, you are again gravely mistaken and need to relearn basic United States history. If you think he can fix our healthcare issues by repealing ObamaCare, leaving 20+ million Americans without a decent health insurance option, then you are literally dooming many of these — your fellow Americans! — to death or disability simply because they can’t afford treatment. And if you think for one moment that he even is remotely qualified or deserving of the role of President of the United States even though he knows so little of the Constitution that he would be sworn to uphold and defend, then you are deeply, horrendously mistaken and I pity just how ignorant you truly are.
Do I agree with every one of Hillary Clinton’s policy proposals and ideals? No, absolutely not! (For example, everything I’ve read about the TPP just makes me despise it more and more.) But when it comes down to it, she has a decent amount of experience and knowledge to succeed in the role of President, which would have put her leaps and bounds above Trump (who has none). In addition, she had the support of Senator Bernie Sanders, former presidential candidate (and arguably someone more suited to the job than even she). I would have hoped that would be enough for those who voted for him in the primary…? But I digress.
Oh well, the long night is over and the election is done, right? Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. (Again.)
Congratulations, America. You’ve made your collective choice. I would have thought it to be a comparatively easy one, but apparently I have forgotten the error of your voting ways. In the 2000 and 2004 elections when you voted in George W. Bush and a GOP-heavy congress, you chose wrong; and those set us back many years of economic, scientific, and sociopolitical growth. I thought you had learned form those failures; but I was incorrect. A decade later and yet again you chose wrong. And the detriment to not only your own country this time, but to the rest of the world will likely be far in excess of anything we can imagine. This is going to leave a scar that time will not easily erase. I’d say to learn from history and not repeat this terrible mistake; but it seems you’ve twice failed to learn the lesson already.
We do have one saving grace, however: The electoral college is in place specifically to ensure that a dangerous candidate, even if victorious in the popular vote, does not become the elected president. I now urge the electors in those red states to do what’s right, going against the ignorance and idiocy of their own populace.
I hope you’re proud of yourselves, America. I’m not. I’m disgraced and disgusted by you. And when so many of you are willing to put such a dangerous and divisive man into power, I am truly scared of what the future holds for our country, for our world, and for humanity.
Categories: Politics Tags: ,

An Open Letter to Ken Ham (And: Thank You, Bill Nye)

September 4th, 2012 No comments

(I don’t normally post rants like this, but every so often I come upon something so frustrating to refrain from doing otherwise. Apologies for the tone.)

This is an open letter to Mr. Ken Ham, and a response to his YouTube video, “Ken Ham Responds to Bill Nye ‘The Humanist Guy’“, since comments are disabled there. Time indices with the quotations are approximate, and mark the end of that quotation in the aforementioned video.

Mr. Ham:

Before I even respond to the video content itself, I want to address one tiny issue: Comments are not enabled on your video. Why would this be? I believe that this is due to the fact that you KNOW in your heart that what you’re saying is neither sensible nor rational; and you simply want to prevent people from flaming you or posting any form of rebuttal to you as a reply. Well, thank goodness people like me have websites where we can post just about anything we want (within legal limits, of course). And here is my rebuttal to you, good sir: YOU ARE AN IMBECILE. Now, let’s examine the content of your video, and I’ll explain to you why I feel this way.

“In fact, Bill Nye doesn’t really understand science.” (0:57, 2:39, 2:42)

Things like this are stated multiple times throughout your video. And I must admit, I am a bit speechless. I don’t even know where to properly begin responding to that. Let me get this straight, then: Someone who doesn’t understand science could earn a Bachelor of Science degree (emphasis mine) from a private, well-reputed, and highly-accredited Ivy-League university? Someone who doesn’t understand science can develop a hydraulic pressure resonance supressor that’s still used in 747s today? Someone who doesn’t understand science can host his own TV show specifically teaching science to a young audience? Someone who doesn’t understand science can make a sundial that also helps with camera color calibration for the Mars probes? Look at Bill Nye’s record through academia and his professional career. OF COURSE that man understands science. He is a scientist. He lives it every day!

“I mean, Bill Nye himself actually is not a scientist. He studied mechanical engineering […]” (1:23)

Well, let’s see here. According to a Google Definition search, the word “scientist” means “A person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences.” So, let’s see if this applies to Bill Nye…is mechanical engineering a natural or physical science? Well, in fact, yes. ME is in essence the science of physical processes and how to apply them for benefits in technology. And does he have expert knowledge of it? Well…he has a Bachelor’s degree from Cornell,  three Honorary Doctorate degrees from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Goucher College, and Johns Hopkins, many years of hands-on experience working for Boeing and as an aeronautics consultant, multiple scientific patents,  and has one of his inventions on the Mars rovers and another in most 747s still in use today (Source). I’d say that qualifies him quite well as an expert. So yeah, he’s an expert in the physical sciences. So, he is a scientist, by your own words. You’re 0-for-2 so far Mr. Ham.

“Bill Nye has an agenda […] to teach them they are the result of evolutionary processes; that they came from slime over millions of years.” (0:53)

“You can divide science into historical science that’s talking about the past, or observational science. That’s the science that builds our technology.” (1:07)

All science is “observational science.” This whole “historical science” talk is nonsense. Bill Nye is a scientist; and science is inherently observational. Science tries to learn and impart knowledge of the truths of the universe; and how do we do this? Through the scientific method, with painstaking attention to detail in reasoning and evidence. We observe what happens in nature and try to understand every tiny piece of the how and the why. And with the multitude of evidence we have for it — fossils, genealogy, tracing disease patterns, microbial growth, etc. — the theory of evolution is quite a sound one. (If you want proper historical science, try a field like paleontology or archaeology.) You’re 0-for-4 so far…

“I mean, the word ‘science’ means ‘knowledge.'” (0:58)

And Mr. Ham scores a point! Oh good. So you are in fact able to produce some iota of reason from that hole in your face.

“He says if you deny evolution to children, they’re going to have problems, because we need engineers. Well wait a minute. Engineering…and evolution? What has evolution got to do with engineering?” (1:19)

I’ll see your irrationality and raise you a “lolwut?”

The problem with denying children evolution is that in so doing, you’re denying them the very concepts of how to think critically. Of how to properly infer knowledge from some data. Of how to support that knowledge with further tests and experiments. Without these critical thinking skills, any attempt at studying engineering will fail before it can even begin. (Heck, I’d wager good money that most of the entire point of engineering is about finding clever solutions to problems in various related fields, like electronics, aerospace, fluid dynamics, architecture, etc.)

“I hope he did not apply any of his evolutionary principles to any of Boeing’s airplanes.” (1:32)

Well, in fact, he did. Not evolutionary processes. But sound technical and scientific principles. And with those he helped develop a hydraulic pressure resonance suppressor for the 747, still in use today.

“I’ll tell you what is real abuse, what is inappropriate for children: When you take generations of kids and you teach them that they’re just animals; [that] there’s no God; you’re a result of millions of years of evolutionary processes.” (2:12)

Call it abuse if you want, but I’ll repeat what I wrote above: Science is about finding and teaching the truths of our universe. Nothing more.

So you then proceed to acknowledge that we can observe and measure radioactivity while at the same time mentioning that bones and fossils aren’t found with photos or timestamps, so we couldn’t know how old they are. But of course, that same radiation-based technology couldn’t, you know, tell us how old those fossils are! (Le’ *gasp*!)

“He doesn’t teach children how to think critically.” (3:06)

Do you actually believe this? Seriously? A scientist who devotes his LIFE to educating the future generations of scientists…doesn’t teach them to think clearly? Are you really this daft?

“If evolution is true, I mean, it’d be so obvious to the kids that it’s true; but it’s not.” (3:29)

Apparently you are that daft! So, let me get this straight…according to you, stuff that’s true is obvious to school children? Hmm…let’s try this. The square of the length of the hypotenuse of a triangle is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides after subtracting twice the product of those two side lengths by the cosine of the acute angle between them. (This is the law of cosines, straight from trigonometry.) This is absolutely true; but is it obvious to children? Heck no. In fact, it’s barely clear to the math students when they first see it.

Okay, maybe you’re not so much a fan of mathematics so let’s try another one – this time from the realm of chemistry. The rate of diffusion or effusion of a gas is inversely proportional to the square root of its molecular mass. This is Graham’s Law, straight from a high school or college chemistry course. Again, this has been experimentally shown to be true; but is it obvious to children? Minus a few child prodigies here and there, I’d say this is definitely not an obvious result to kids.

 “You have to do what Bill Nye the Humanist Guy wants. You have to protect them from hearing anything about creation. You totally indoctrinate them. You brainwash them. You don’t teach them to think critically at all.” (3:50)

Indoctrination. Brainwashing. Those are some pretty good terms for teaching creationism.

“Isn’t it interesting how Christians are not frightened to teach their children about evolution?” (4:10)

Apparently you’re trying to make them so. And if not, why even have this argument at all?

“[…] and see why you don’t want Bill Nye ‘the Humanist Guy'” teaching your children.” (4:36)

God-willing, I’d love to have Bill Nye teach my kids science. When I was a boy, he was one of a few who really helped inspire in me a deep appreciation for mathematics and sciences, and I would come home from school eager to see another episode of Bill Nye the Science Guy on PBS. (Even nowadays, I try to catch episodes of Bill Nye’s Solving for X when I can. Sure, they’re usually topics I already know quite well, but he covers them in such neat ways, and has very clever and humorous demonstrations to show them.)

So, in closing, I’d like to repeat my opening remark: Mr. Ken Ham, you are an imbecile. It’s people like you that are holding back our society. Holding back our scientific progress. Stop with your lies and stop spreading FUD about things of which you know seemingly so little. Please disconnect your computers entirely from the internet, and make it a better place in so doing.

I would also like to end this open letter by extending a personal debt of gratitude to Bill Nye. If you are reading this, Mr. Nye, thank you for all that you’ve done for science. And thank you for standing up to religious weirdos like Mr. Ham over here. *thumbs up*

Respectfully yours,

Peter Gordon

Categories: Science Tags: , ,

CSUs to Cut Spring 2010 Admissions

July 15th, 2009 2 comments

This is absolutely crazy. Someone just posted it to our Facebook group:

Lowering Enrollment: Budget Cuts Force California State University to Close 2010 Spring Admissions

As part of an overall strategy to address an unprecedented budget reduction of $584 million for 2009-10, California State University campuses will not accept student applications for the 2010 spring term – with very few exceptions.

In addition, quarter campuses that have been accepting admission applications for the 2010 winter term ceased accepting applications as of July 6.

“Only fully-eligible, first-time freshmen, upper-division undergraduate transfers or graduate and post-baccalaureate applicants who have applied for admission prior to July 6 may be offered admission to the 2010 winter term,” said Jeri Echeverria, CSU executive vice chancellor and chief academic officer.

In addition, no admission applications will be accepted for the 2010 spring term at either quarter or semester campuses, for any enrollment category. CSU has typically admitted more than 35,000 freshmen, undergraduate transfer and graduate students during the spring term.

This is just so unbelievably wrong. A strong education is the foundation of a prosperous workforce. I’m all for fixing the economy, but cutting off one of its roots is not the right way to do it! I’m stunned and quite speechless. 😮

Categories: Life Tags: , , ,