T-Day Minus One

Posted on by

Yesterday the Mahadaughter and I got out of cooking by going to the Thanksgiving buffet at a fancy local hotel. The food was OK, but I really miss pigging out on the leftovers for the rest of the weekend. So think of me when you bite into your turkey sandwiches.

Some stuff for your post-feast digestion — first, noting that I’m generally ambivalent about Noam Chomsky, I really did appreciate his response to a truther:

The truthers’ response to the video is typically trutherish. The truther in the video cited a “consensus” of 2000 architects regarding Building 7, apparently saying its destruction was a planned demolition, or something. Chomsky dismissed the 2,000 as an inconsequential number. “Noam please do your math. Over 2000 architects does not equal a few,” said one commenter. Um, out of how many architects in the U.S. now? Not to mention engineers and physicists? And the consensus of the truthers is that Chomsky — Noam Chomsky, mind you — is now a lackey of the U.S. government. MIT gets significant funding from the Pentagon, after all (wink, nudge).

I don’t always agree with Noam, but I respect him for his independence. And if there’s any group of people on the planet more irrational than baggers, it’s truthers.

See also “A Realist’s Take on Obamacare,” “Obamacare’s Secret Success” and “Rooting for Failure.”

11 thoughts on “T-Day Minus One”

  2. Truthers at least are trying to refer to real scientific ‘things’- and “evidence,” real or imagined – like math and engineering.

    Birther’s, on the other hand, are going against easily verifiable documented evidence, and are refuting every single aspect of it.

    And baggars have some distorted and delusional views of history – going against, again, easily verifiable evidence.

    Here, imo, is my ranking:
    1. Birthers.
    2. Baggers.
    3. Truthers.

  3. This business about a consensus of 2,000 architects reminds me of these statements the creationists put out where X number of scientists (who often turn our to be dentists or TV weathermen) say they don’t believe in evolution.

    Well, I have no idea whether these 2,000 architects are all architects, and I don’t really care to find out, but it’s a fallacy either way. Argumentum ad verecundiam.

  4. Small turkey pieces can be bought economically right after T-day and you wouldn’t be the first person to cook yourself “leftovers” from a meal that didn’t actually happen. I won’t say how I know, I just do, OK? 🙂

  5. Sometimes I wonder how the hell the good people of texas can be so ingnorant as to impose the likes of Ted Cruz on this fine nation. Then there is THIS? Secede already!!!

  6. Truthers are left-wing crazies who want to get Bush for being the most evil person who ever lived. Birthers are right-wing crazies who want to get Obama for being (drum roll) the most evil person who ever lived. *sigh* In both scenarios, the fanatics are willing to suspend all cognitive processes – completely quit thinking – to advocate fervently a theory which doesn’t conform to objective reality.

    Which brings us to the most repulsive feature of their crusade(s). They put the objective (getting the president they hate) ahead of logic. How many people does it take to make the earth flat by believing the world is flat. Was the world flat for Milena until there were enough round-earth believers? It’s a funny example, but when confronted with a lack of objective evidence, both groups will declare it’s true because it’s popular.

    Global warming is real – the numbers are there. Photographic evidence from space, gathered over decades, shows the polar cap receding. The cause may never be established, nor does it matter. If a wildfire threatens your home, do you research the original cause of the fire (and elect to let it consume your house if it’s the result of lightning, a natural cause)?

    IMO, one of the main differences between liberals and conservatives is that conservatives tend to start with a conclusion and look for supporting facts and they will NOT abandon their conclusion even when confronted with overwhelming contradictory facts. Liberals tend (and there are exceptions) to start with a hypothesis or theory and they are more objective in gathering evidence and they WILL modify their theory (and conclusion) when evidence shows they are wrong.

    A corollary to this is that conservatives think the only solutions are a) lower taxes b) less regulation or c) there is no problem (denial). When confronted with ANY issue, those are the only options they will consider. Liberals, on a good day, will let the problem definition lead to a design of a solution without prejudice.

  8. I’ll put rapture ready Christians and rush Limbaugh ditto heads far ahead of that group any day.

  10. Oh, but the 9/11 commossioners repereadly said the report was obsructed and wanted criminal prosecutions against military officials, german, russian and french military intelligence dismiss official story as impossible, and you beleive three massive steel-framed towers collapsed into their own footprints–the only time in history–all on the same day from novice pilots who couldn’t land a cessna. Wow, you’re gullible.

Comments are closed.