Spelling errors.

BA : the one web change I’d like to see here more than anything else is giving us the ability to edit these posts!

For the record & in case anyone hasn’t picked it – my “Xena = gay activist conspiracy theory” was indeed intended as tongue in cheek.

If you look hard enough and warp your thinking badly enough you can come up with almost any rubbish about why people name things as they do.

The post above was meant to illustrate that and poke fun at the Right-Wingers take on a “liberal” scientists conspiracy by taking tehsame idea sand showing a totally different way of looking at it. Sadly, now I think about it; those easily led are all too likely to take it seriously.

Sigh.

The original Xena was a lesbian icon! The moon, Gabrielle, was named after her adventuring (and bed-related?) partner!

Clearly Mike Brown was a gay activist!

Renaming it Eris wa s adeliberate move of the intoler~rany Bible-Bashing bigoted rRightwing to rob us of a lebian planet! Stripping Pluto of aits planetary status was just another part of this anti-gay conspiracy .. After all keeping plutio would have meant adding a planet -moon pairing representing gaymarriage and implying that’s alright! (Oh no I said stripping Net nanny will now bar this site! My comments will be blocked! We’ll all be censored!)

Get some perspective here puh-leeze!

Personally, I blame it all on the Puritan(~ical) Fathers – a more sexually repressed, narrow-minded bunch of fundamentalists, and a worse choice of people to found a nation on you couldn’t find.

(You know I’m actually quite serious about that last point – A nation that froths at the mouth when Janet Jackson inadvertantly exposed _part_ of one breast but shrugged its shoulders at a hereditary “President” + lying his nation into a needless and utterly counter-productive war is a very messed-up nation with a very bad “childhood” indeed.)

Every scientists who distorts research outcomes does not attack the credibility of the scientific process. Everyone is not out there referring to science as a liberal and therefore negative entity. But certain people are. They have not been able to find the scientific evidence they want to find, so they make claims such as, science is just someone else’s religion. Others make statements suggesting everyone is distorting the evidence therefore science is really unable to resolve a question like, “Are humans impacting the global climate?”

Those tactics call into question the validity and reliability of the scientific process. It is a subtle attack, it goes unnoticed. Then it surfaces as a belief science is just one set of beliefs among many, not qualitatively different. It surfaces as a belief scientists are predominantly liberals so all of science can be expected to favor liberal ideas rather than expecting the scientific process to favor the evidence. Or it surfaces as a belief all research outcomes are politically biased if they involve a political issue therefore one cannot use the scientific process to resolve a question with political implications.

None of those beliefs accurately reflect true science and the majority of the skeptical scientific community. All of those beliefs are spreading. The bogger in this case is reflecting a wider and growing opinion and it does need to be addressed, even if it is merely pointing out a single straw in a camel’s load.