CH 212-3001--University of Nevada, Reno//Summer 2018--RUMINATION 007--EVOLUTION & 5 QUESTIONS

CH 212-3001

University of Nevada, Reno

Prof A Thibault

Summer 2018  25 June 18

James C Langelle

Rumination 007:  Evolution

What do you think the role of scientific controversy is?

The question is not whether there is a role for controversy in science, but can it be constructively presented in the academic community. That is, without obstruction from the US Constitution or the Supreme Court as in the case of intelligent design.

Darwin's theories, perhaps more than any other in the past two centuries, have evoked strong camps in the US-- where is the line between debate of new ideas and ethical/moral repercussions and the type of entrenchment that Darwinian theory has seen?  

Intelligent design (ID) has been challenged in court due primarily to its failure to offer any scientific proof of its validity. If credibility of a theory in science is based on observation and experimentation, then other claims, such as the origin of man, need to be addressed using the same parameters.

How does scientific discovery then intersect with issues of freedom of speech or religion?

If the discovery becomes a paradigm that would infringe upon the rights guaranteed by the Constitution, then it needs to be challenged in a court of law; not just by bloggers on the internet or ignorant twitter trolls who have no desire to separate facts from fiction.

To that extent, is this knowledge "necessary" or could it be black-boxed to reduce controversy?

Do not take anything for granted without thorough understanding of the motives and the facts behind a controversy.

Furthermore, how does scientific "fact" shape or create worldview?

More so, the lack of scientific fact can greatly impede progress. This has been seen time and again in recurring epidemics such as ebola in Africa where, following an outbreak, certain procedures are followed, only to be ignored once the epidemic subsides.

From an anthropological perspective, this is just one worldview of a particular culture- a scientific culture. Anthropology would then argue for relativism. Do you think that the belief in scientific fact is relative?

Reduction of natural phenomena to an ethnocentric bias leads to confrontation when a crisis emerges, especially in underdeveloped countries where disease and epidemic occur. Anthropologists might prefer to see the witch doctor come up with a life saving elixir but the World Health Organization has other ideas. Often times, the WHO doctors and nurses are put at risk due to the very bias of the locals in an environment associated with anthropology.

Or, do you think that its enforcement is a type of scientific imperialism?

The reason there are such laws such as quarantine of an epidemic outbreak is to prevent it from spreading. There are always any number of so-called community groups that, for personal, religious or political motives, use means at their disposal to criticize what may be for the benefit of all.

Five Questions:

What evidence best supports evolution (Ex: geological, paleontological, anthropological)?

Is the geologic-fossil record adequate to explain gaps in evolution that have been placed into the “missing link” file?

Which geologic theory best supports evolution, young-earth or old-earth?

Is there any evidence in earth science to support spontaneous generation of a species?

How do you account for prehistoric remains of man appearing in various remote locations around the globe?

TRADEWAR PRIMER--Quantitative vs. Qualitative-- THE (NO) CALL TO DUTY ROSTER

ENG102-1105//ESSAY//UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA, RENO//SPRING 2018//PROF M JUDD

PRELIMINARY ESSAY NOTES #002--

     (Starbucks Cantina)--Curiously, the items that are being tossed about for tariff consideration have some similarities and some major differences. Note that there is a major discrepancy first of all in the overall number of products under consideration; for China the list stands just over 100 items, for the United States, the trade cops have pegged 1300 plus items for import tax.
    

Posted on CNBC last Wednesday, the China boycott consists of products that range from foodstuffs, automobiles and chemicals:


https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/04/the-full-list-of-us-products-that-china-is-planning-to-hit-with-tariffs.html

Some of the items listed the general population probably has no interest in at all with the exception of tobacco. There appears to be some question as to why there is great emphasis on what looks like a luxury item, expensive automobiles. As if the average Chinese person needs some high-profile SUV for the upcoming ski sojourn in the Himalayas. Is this just a political statement or will it actually impact the US auto industry? In fact, many of these types of vehicles can be obtained from other sources, as can numerous items on the list. What's not on the list?  Educational materials, electronic gadgets, and household items that would make life easier and more convenient for the the working class.  There is also no mention of clothing items.

As for the reciprocal barriers being imposed by the United States, the list is far more extensive, but doesn't necessarily include familiar items that may be found in the large shopping markets like WalMart.   The media has made a big deal out of exporting soy products and steel-aluminum exports but little has been said, once again, of what's not on the list:


 https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Press/Releases/301FRN.pdf

Again, it appears the average working stiff consumer may escape the escalating  standoff as many products, are just not relevant to his or her needs.  Some or most of the electronic gadgets the American can do without or can find from another market.  Much of the stuff, from chemicals to aircraft to machine motor parts have no place in the lower echelon consumer market, where demand is based on need, not on component assembly for a complete product for consumption.
Given also that there are tens of thousands of items categorized on the HTSUS, it would be difficult to hammer down just where deprivation exists for the Jenny Average in the middle and lower classes. Once again, the absence of clothing items, shoes, and personal commodities seem to have taken backstage to the tariff pegging performance currently running at the administration playhouse.
     It also appears the trade bureau had to look long and hard to come up with the comprehensive list of 1300 plus items to make the effort pay off, since there may not be as many big ticket items coming out of China to make the tariff endeavor profitable. It may be no surprise as a result that both the Hang Seng and the Dow show positive gains today as the traders, the other traders, don't see much future in threats over trade taxing, boycotts and embargoes, not now, or historically.