Knoxville Progressive had an interesting short diary this morning that said the following:
U.S. Patent Issued for Anti-Gravity Device
by Knoxville Progressive
Thu Nov 10th, 2005 at 09:42:00 AM EDT
Let’s see – the regime that has given us or promoted the following scientific advances:
* Intelligent Design (biology)
* Video Diagnosis (Frist procedure to test for brain activity)
* “Global Warming is a myth” (climatology)
* too many disastrous environmental decisions to name…
* Kabbala Holy Water to protect FL citrus crops (agriculture)
…has now moved into the realm of physics, as reported by UPI:
The journal Nature said patent 6,960,975 was granted Nov. 1 [seven months to the day too late – KP] to Boris Volfson of Huntington, Ind., for a space vehicle propelled by a superconducting shield that alters the curvature of space-time outside the craft in a way that counteracts gravity.
One of the main theoretical arguments against anti-gravity is that it implies the availability of unlimited energy.
“If you design an anti-gravity machine, you’ve got a perpetual-motion machine,” Robert Park of the American Physical Society told Nature.
Park said the action shows patent examiners are being duped by false science.
False science? Now who could accuse our dear leaders of that?
I’m sure I’m forgetting other examples; feel free to add to the list…
******
I was interested by that, and spent some time tracking down the news reports, and added the following comment:
It is ridiculous to blame the Bush regime for something like this. There is no evidence of that. This report originally came from the prestigious journal Nature, with the headline noting that this had “slipped by” the Patent Office. The Patent Office reviews millions of patent applications. It makes howling mistakes every year, which are regularly reported by science publications. It is a mistake by an individual bureaucrat, and at that grade level they are career employees, not political appointees. So it’s just not reasonable to blame the Bush regime for this. Wild leaps of logic like that, which are plainly contrary to the facts, undermine the credibility of lefty advocacy.
As for “intelligent design,” it is possible to be completely in tune with scientific understandings in biology and still to believe that God designed the world that way. Most intelligent Catholics take that position. Science provides the how and faith the why, one might say. That may not sound very “progressive,” but it is a reasoned and consistent position. And on this point too, it’s not really fair to claim that the Bush regime has caused an outbreak of intelligent design!
But you’re sure right about climate and environment.
*****
And someone named Salunga came along and gave me a damned 0 Megatroll rating for the above.
So what the fuck makes that a “Megatroll” statement, Salunga?!
Knoxville Progressive, who posts lots of interesting diaries and comments, seemed pretty earnest in that diary to me, and it seemed to me worthwhile to point out that low-level Patent Office grundoons are not really Bush political appointees. That’s a Washington, D.C. fact that some people might overlook, although probably not most of the political junkies on a blog like this.
Maybe I need my snark meter adjusted, as Knoxville Progressive implied. That’s fair.
But I thought my post was polite and respectful. Why would you give me a drive-by zero, with no comment? That’s barbaric.
What’s the problem? Do you think it’s totally out of bounds to term the substance of someone’s post “ridiculous”? Are you Knoxville Progressive’s secret lover? Do you think that religious people are all trolls?
I think you owe me an explanation and an apology.
And yes, I impulsively went and immediately gave you a “1” on one of your posts (couldn’t bring myself to give a zero), and that was wrong.
It is a great torment of mine that I can’t seem to find a stable and safe community on the Internet. I’m a Yellow Dog Democrat. I’ve voted in every election for more than 30 years, and I’ve never voted for anything other than a D. I contribute heavily to Democratic and human rights causes, and to charities. I’m a bleeding heart liberal (and former hippie) to the core. (I don’t call myself a “progressive”–I know there are exceptions, but I think that is too often a code word for “atheist.”)
I’ve been thrown off right-winger boards for being too liberal (although it’s been an awful long time since I was on such a board) and from left-winger boards for being too conservative. Crap. I’m tired of that.
Has the DailyKos authoritarian groupthink taken over here as well?
As I said, would you please pay me the courtesy of an explanation?
Yes, I know it can be obnoxious for a diary to be devoted to ratings issues, and I apologize for that. This is the first time I’ve posted such a diary anywhere. In context, I just kind of hope for an explanation and dialogue. I like this blog, and I’d like to keep feeling comfortable here while we continue to witness the almost miraculous frog-marching of all the GOP leaders.
(I’ve got to be so careful. I offended catnip in one of my first posts here. Shoot. I’m a lawyer. I’m used to shooting down arguments in debate, without meaning it personally. In my daily life, I get along peacefully with almost everybody. It’s really a mystery to me why I keep getting into fights on the Internet. I really do sincerely want to solve this problem. Among other things, it’s interfering with my very real desire to see Bush and Cheney go to prison for war crimes. Thank you for reading this, and please be gentle with any flames.)
–Arminius, who smited the Romans in the Teutoberg Forest
It could be that Salunga intended to post a rating other than 0. Many times when I’ve intended to post a 4 another number has come up inadvertently and I’ve had to re-rate.
I have that happen sometimes… I have yet to mark a zero but I have accidentally put up a few 2s and 3s… (I actually go back and check once in a while)
Heck… I have had someone give me a great reply to a comment and noticed that they gave less than a 4… I chalk it up to an OOPS.
That might be the case, I guess.
Since I’m supposed to be Christian, I’m supposed to assume the best of others, even love my enemies for crying out loud. And I’m not good at that. Maybe I got this wrong. If so, that’ll be great.
I am probably the most quilty party here of accidentally dishing out 3s, especially at work as I have a sticky mouse. I just go back and change them. I have even gotten called out on it through emails and comments. I always feel like such a dope when that happens. Y’all know I either give a 4 or don’t rate at all.
.
Nevertheless – Good Morning Alohaleezy!
I use the 3’s as motivation to try harder, now I’ll have to track back to see if the ratings have been changed? LOL
How to find the time for a double check!
“Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”
▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY
that “Intelligent Design” thing. The ID folks have a a specific agenda that is not what you describe. This is a wide spread misconception, and making sure that folks don’t know what they are really up to is part of their strategy. We scientists are not fighting them because we are opposed to people believing in God. We are fighting them because they are opposed to science teachers (like me) teaching science.
See my comment here for more explanation. I plead with my students – please don’t say you embrace “Intelligent Design” unless you really believe that evolution by natural selection is wrong and did not happen. If you believe in God the Creator, say I believe God is the Creator. “Intelligent Design” means something different.
Janet, I’m late and maybe you’ll never see this, but I agree with this thoughtful comment of yours and I’ll try to remember it. FWIW, I’m an educated Catholic who is a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, among other science memberships. I do believe that natural selection is correct, at least as described by Darwin and not necessarily as extended by people like Dawkins.
It is ridiculous to blame the Bush regime for something like this.
I concur but would probably have not used the word ‘ridiculous’. Bob Park’s criticism of what he calls “junk” or “voodoo” science predates the Bush adminsitration. Some examples:
from Bob Park’s What’s New 1999
4. PATENT OFFICE: FALLOUT FROM FUTURE ENERGY CONFERENCE.
One result of the recent conference on over-unity concepts (WN 30 Apr 99) was that it led to a close look at the Patent and Trademark Office. The conference was hosted by the Integrity Research Institute, whose president, Tom Valone, is a patent examiner. WN has been warning for some time about efforts to infiltrate the Patent Office with examiners sympathetic to fringe science (WN 20 Nov 98). In this week’s Science magazine David Voss reports on his investigation of the Patent Office. In addition to patents awarded for various cold-fusion and over-unity devices, the DKL Lifeguard, a dowsing rod with lights and buttons (WN 25 Sep 98), and an electrical switch operated by ESP, have made the cut.
from 1999:
3. PERPETUUM MOBILE: ABC TO EXPOSE FREE ELECTRICITY HUCKSTER.
Dennis Lee is three-fourths of the way through his 45 city tour of the US to demonstrate his technology for making unlimited free electricity (WN 1 Oct 99). He’s been tracked by ABC Good Morning America consumer reporter Janice Lieberman. Her report is set for next Friday. Lee depends on “permanent magnet motors that are more than 200% efficient” and the “Fourth Law of Motion” to make free electricity. All it takes to get one of his machines installed in your home, so you can be disconnected from the grid before the Y2K crisis blacks out everyone else, is a $275 gift to Better World Technologies, Inc., and I’m from the planet Mongo.
from 1998:
3. RESEARCH: STEM-CELL DISCOVERY REIGNITES POLITICAL CONTROVERSY.
The announcement yesterday that undifferentiated embryonic cells have been isolated and cultivated has enormous implications for medical science. But four years ago, anti-abortionists pushed a bill through Congress banning the use of federal funds for human embryo research. This has NIH lawyers trying to figure out if the ban applies to laboratory-reared embryonic cells, grown with private funds. Anti-abortion activists have made it clear that they regard cultivated embryonic cells as human life. To have no scientists involved in the stem cell research who are detached from its commercial possibilities is an uncomfortable prospect.