He's a failed scientist. He hasn't published anything in 15 years so he withers away in obscurity at some shitty teaching university and spouts garbage.

is that none of the writers are actually scientists. Myers hasn't published in 15 years and Giberson published one paper in 1983 his entire career. Active, legitimate scientists are too engaged in their work to worry about such trivial things as science vs. religion. It's all the "scientists" that get weeded out that need to do something else with their PhD that end up doing these sorts of things. In other words, if these guys were worth a damn scientifically they'd be doing science and not writing articles.

To correct my last post, after further inquiry, it appears Giberson has published six or so papers in the early 80s.

Seriously, the Journal of Computer Assisted Microscopy? And a second author paper as faculty is not good. By all accounts he flopped. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that he didn't get a grant when he was faculty at Temple, and because he didn't publish anything he didn't get tenure, and that lead to this new career as a non-research professor. As for the two submitted, they sound more like reviews than research articles.

And the same could (and should) be said of these extremist, anti-religion "scientists."

those look like meeting abstracts, not publications.

I'm just trying to point out that these guys, and those that engage in these debates, aren't actual contributing scientists. And that this debate does not go on within the contributing scientific community (aside from a conversation over a beer). Ask Rosie, she's a real biologist.

Uh, meeting abstracts are not publications. That's not nit-picky at all.

"A new raft of chastity books laments a hookup culture that is hurting young women. As one of those young women, I beg to disagree."

You're not one of those young women. You are not representative of greater American society. You are responsible, successful, and one might guess (single-sex college) that you were raised by a well-to-do family and were given every advantage to be successful along the way. You're not the target of anti-casual sex ire.

Obama's flip-flop on offshore oil drilling. How can anyone take this guy seriously?

there would be off-shore oil drilling where there wasn't before under his watch. That is a flip-flop. Daily it becomes more difficult to take his campaign seriously.

I'll definitely trust Obama's compromise because he did so well with FISA.

Seriously, you guys can be Obama supporters without explaining away every problem. It's okay to disagree with him. It's okay to point out inconsistencies. He's not a fucking demigod.

Your calculation assumes that 100% of motorists are driving on improperly inflated tires. That is absurd. I haven't seen an estimate for the number of cars that are driving on improperly inflated tires, but Obama should have had that number in hand before trotting out his tire gauge energy solution.

I agree that all the little things we can do will help.

But I still think that Obama should have realized that this would be ridiculed and should have been ready with better numbers.

Your "subject" line asks "What is ridiculed?" The McCain campaign is ridiculing Obama's energy policy largely because of the tire gauge thing (http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0808/McCain_camp_amps_up_tire_gauge_gag_.html). Regardless of whether it's sound policy, I feel like Obama should have saw this coming, and been ready with hard figures. It almost would have been a great way to bait the McCain camp into ridiculing the idea, and then spank them with the numbers. I feel like the Obama from the primaries would have had the numbers ready.

Then maybe Obama wasn't the best candidate for the Democrats to trot out. Maybe you should have realized all of this before you voted for him. Maybe you should have thought about his electability before you sent in that check. Or do you enjoy the fact that he doesn't get the support of the biker crowd/middle america because it provides you with an opportunity to show just how different (read: better) you are then those people?

And this is exactly why. I would venture to guess that most Americans found what McCain said about his wife humorous, and they are able to relate. Hell, if I had a wife that looked that good at that age I'd be a happy man, etc. Ever since the Democratic party was hijacked by liberal elites the ability to connect to the general population has disappeared. The MoveOn, DailyKos, Code Pink, Nancy Pelosi crowd have destroyed the party. I just hope it's temporary.

not whether this is demeaning to women blah blah blah, it's that This is politics. McCain is connecting with voters and is slowly becoming the Beer drinking buddy (as pointed out by one of the Broadsheeters) that can win an election, while Obama is being defined as an elitist, Europe-loving, disconnected, flip-flopping, raise-your-taxes liberal. The Dems are slowly letting this election slip away. The more McCain works the "ICBYBDB" angle, the more alien Obama becomes, which doesn't bode well for November.

as to why the books are selling so well? It's because the American public realizes that they can't rely on the Obama-loving media for any information critical of Obama, and have to turn elsewhere for the other side of the coin.

Are you serious? Honestly, have you never made a comment or joke about women? The self-righteousness on this board is unbelievable.

Not to mention my point was that while the left is busy working up their fake-outrage hard ons McCain is scoring points with potential voters. What's Obama up to these days?

I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who doesn't think Obama gets far more favorable media coverage than McCain. And calling his painfully blatant changes in position "justified or nuanced" is a joke. It is because they are so blatant that the media is forced to highlight them.