Which state? (Update – answer revealed)
Thursday, September 27, 2012 at 07:00am 30 Comments
From reader Brian.
Which state could this possibly be?
Don’t read the comments before voting, in case there is a spoiler.
Poll open until 5 p.m. Eastern today
UPDATE: It’s California.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
ARGGGH! No bumper stickers … get to our own distaff Ulysses Everett McGill, please!
But gravity isn’t a theory, it’s a physical Law. If evolution were explainable via an Algebra I level equation (such as with gravity) we would have, um, consensus.
I suspect Algebra I is a bit advanced for the driver.
It seems that there is a tendency to skip the scientific method and go directly to declaration of a law. This has possibly resulted, at least in the minds of more than a few, that theory and law are equivalent.
Straight from theory to law? Is that kind of like having to pass a bill to know what’s in it?
(yeah, yeah, I know the difference between a physical law and a legislative law… it’s a joke)
Yes, it is a joke, isn’t it?
Too bad the woman who gave us that line didn’t know what a joke it was.
The only reason there is any popular argument over the theory of evolution at all is because of the personality differences between biologists and physicists. Biologists allow themselves to get drawn into conversations with ignorant people. Physicists do not.
Evolution as a description of origin can neither be reproduced nor tested. It is not a scientific theory but a philosophical construct which correlates with a bounded emergent pattern, both through (a permanent condition of) limited physical evidence, and the creative minds of biologists, philosophers, and politicians. It represents an alternative faith for individuals who reject God, gods, or an objective perspective.
It’s worth noting that while many people accept the article of faith premise for evolution, they reject evolutionary principles in preference for dreams of instant gratification, especially physical. In fact, they reject evolution as theory or philosophy as they seek to normalize behaviors which constitute evolutionary dysfunction.
I suppose that every faith has its apostates. However, to ignore or reject principles which are required for species viability can only be described as suicidal. Some rebels and rebellions are more threatening than others.
“Evolution as a description of origin can neither be reproduced nor tested.”
Be clear. Do you mean origin of life or origin of species? This statement is meaningless without that detail. Evolution addresses only the origins of new species and says absolutely nothing about biogenesis, the origin of life itself. Either way, you are in error. Evolution has been observed in the lab, in fact, it has been under constant observation in many labs for many years. One example is described here:
“It is not a scientific theory but a philosophical construct which correlates with a bounded emergent pattern, both through (a permanent condition of) limited physical evidence, and the creative minds of biologists, philosophers, and politicians. It represents an alternative faith for individuals who reject God, gods, or an objective perspective.”
That disease is caused not by ‘bad spirits’ or ‘bad air’ and is instead caused by germs is called the Germ Theory. Is the fact of this negated by use of the word ‘theory’? Of course not – because it doesn’t offend anyone’s personal religious beliefs. However, the same people who accept germ theory as correct throw up their hands and cry foul at evolution theory, even though it carries every bit as much supportive evidence and works just as well in practical applications as does germ theory.
I think it’s clear you don’t know what a scientific theory is and may have conflated it with the common usage of the word ‘theory‘, that of an educated guess, but you know when one offends your religious beliefs. There is no wall between evolution theory and religious belief, except those walls self-erected in the minds of those who feel a need to refute evolution because they believe it threatens their religious beliefs.
Definition of scientific theory:
“It’s worth noting that while many people accept the article of faith premise for evolution, they reject evolutionary principles in preference for dreams of instant gratification, especially physical. In fact, they reject evolution as theory or philosophy as they seek to normalize behaviors which constitute evolutionary dysfunction.
I suppose that every faith has its apostates. However, to ignore or reject principles which are required for species viability can only be described as suicidal. Some rebels and rebellions are more threatening than others.”
The proof is in the pudding. 19th century scientists and mechanical engineers developed hypotheses of powered flight, which is all well and good on the drawing table and in the lab, but the proof comes in the testing. When tests prove their hypotheses correct, it becomes a scientific theory. Of course, we now have powered flight based on those early hypotheses. It worked. In the same manner, the theory of evolution is the cornerstone of all biology, and all of its subsets: pharmacology, agriculture, medicine, etc., based on one criterion only – it works when put into practice. Not philosophy, not theological suppositions of what should or ought to happen, but hard, applied science. It works. Every prescription pill taken, every medical procedure, every pesticide, every fertilizer, and so on, ultimately depends on the well-established efficacy of evolutionary theory. If one accepts that viri (viruses) can develop immunity to vaccines, requiring new vaccines, one has accepted the theory of evolution, specifically the adaptation aspect. I could go on for pages with similar examples.
Evolution will not be refuted or disproved by smug recitations of one’s own personal philosophies – except in that reciter’s own head, of course.
It is not the content of your post that brings my post in response, it is the smugness with which you offer it, and the fact that were it not for the practical benefits you and everyone else have enjoyed that derive directly from evolution theory, you wouldn’t recognize your own life, indeed, may not be alive today to be so smug about it.
This is not the post we’ve been waiting for… (Star Wars music)
Ah, but it’s another state Professor Warren isn’t licensed to practice law in.
Maybe the professor would use the following to introduce his announcement:
I say California, more specifically, Marin County.
This car has a real stoner vibe coming from it. I’d bet $10 the driver is a 20-something single male and quite the marijuana aficionado. And in California. Probably a student at a community college or a university of lesser prestige. He doesn’t strike me as a guy with a job. Perhaps a few hours a week in retail, but most of his income comes from his well-to-do-parents and government student aid.
“A Veil of Red” is a California punk band. The ‘Fairfax’ is probably Fairfax, CA. “Immigration reform” tends to be a border-state thing, and big around the San Francisco area. The ‘Bat Country’ quote is from the film Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, which, like The Big Lebowski is a stoner favorite. And the ‘Milenium Falcon’ sticker screams ‘geek’, as does the zombie sticker.
It amazes me what people do to their vehicles. Then, again, it is a Chevy. Ford owner wouldn’t do something like this, let alone believe in evolution.
Yeah, it’s a Chevy.
I was thinking CA till I saw that, but we don’t have many US cars here….
I just saw a bumper sticker at patriotdepot.com that has a RED background with YELLOW letters & Soviet Hammer & Sickle:
I’m ordering it despite the fact that I’ll never clutter my near flawless Lexus RX-300 with signage.
Had one for parking in my assigned spot at Disney Studios(Burbank)in 2004: A PERSON OF TOLERANCE & DIVERSITY KEYED MY CAR!
Most here are, no doubt, familiar with rightwingstuff.com. Many, many, many to choose from in apparel, signage, etc.
Notice the NASA meatball? Has to be near a NASA center, and the only state on the list with a NASA center is California (in fact, CA has 3 centers, I’m guessing this is northern California, near Ames, but could be down south by JPL)
The state of delusion.
I gotta go with California. The NASA thing…
First guess is Texas. Second is Virginia.
neither of which is on the list
Of the states on the list only California and Vermont have towns named Fairfax. NASA in Vermont? Unlikely. It is also unlikely few outside of California ever heard of the punk band Veil of Red, which hails from Petaluma. Also, Fairfax, which is Marin County, is only about 20 miles away from Petaluma. Thus I predict this car is from California, probably not too far north of San Francisco.
Not to mention “BAT Country” is from the Californian band “Avenged Sevenfold”.
I wonder, though, who says the bumper stickers were applied to the car in the same locale at which the photo was taken?
An awful lot of those stickers point to being applied in Virginia – there are extensive bicycle trails in Fairfax County (just South of Washington, DC), There are extensive NASA installations (@Langley AFB and Wallops Island), and no particular shortage of deluded Obama/Biden supporters. 🙁
Cripe. I guessed New Mexico. California was too utterly obvious.
No surprise there.
So. It’s after 5 edt; where’s the answer?
There is a town and county called Fairfax in Virginia, suburb of DC, so that’s at least three possible states. And yes Fairfax VA is also a hot bed of nutty liberals.
I would say Fairfax, Virginia. Langley (Goddard Space Flight Center) is close by.
But Virginia is not on the list, so I guess wrong.
As a Central Florida(Winter Park)refugee from the Peoples Republic of California, I picked correctly, Duuhhhh.(-: