Liberals Don’t Understand Space

I can honestly say I cannot understand this at all, but looking at it and understanding liberals and especially progressives, it really doesn’t surprise me at all.  Back in the early 1970s, we sent the Pioneer 10 spacecraft into space.  It had a golden plaque which tried to explain, in simple terms, who had sent the probe.  It had a picture of a male and female human and a depiction of our solar system, all in hopes that if someone found it, dozens or maybe hundreds of years in the future, they might have some idea who we are and, perhaps, where to find us.

You might think this is very simple stuff, but no, not for modern-day progressives who don’t care about contacting alien life, they only care about their own political and ideological agendas.  At a recent conference in Leeds, England, a group of British scientists who work for SETI, entered a contest to design another plaque that might tell aliens about the human species, but of course, nothing is that easy.  Now, you have radical feminists and other progressive assholes who don’t want to tell aliens who we are, they desperately want to pass along a politically correct message so the aliens are aware of their liberal views on sexuality, gender, leftist social views, etc.  It’s just  going to guarantee that no alien in their right mind will ever visit our planet because we’ll have scared them away.

According to Jill Stewart, a supposed expert on space policy at the London School of Economics, “The plaque shows a man raising his hand in a very manly fashion while a woman stands behind him, appearing all meek and submissive. We really need to rethink that with any messages we are sending out now. Attitudes have changed so much in just 40 years.”

No, you moron, the plaque shows nothing of the kind.  It shows a man and a woman standing side by side, she isn’t behind him. He is raising his hand in greeting, not in a “manly fashion”.  Are you people really that stupid?  Others have raised criticism that the man and woman are supposedly white and therefore, not representative of our racial diversity.  Honestly, you can’t say what race they are, they are line drawings and no shading would actually work in this situation, they could be just about any race if you wanted them to be.

This whole thing is really absurd, the whole purpose of sending a picture, or any signal for that matter, is to greet potential alien species that might come across them!  It isn’t to hold an in-depth cultural debate.  It isn’t to show aliens that we’ve got a bunch of morons running the show.  This isn’t about human attitudes, this is about passing along information that may take hundreds, or thousands, or even millions of years to be found, if it ever is.  Attitudes on Earth may have changed in the last 40 years, but Pioneer 10 is still in our local neighborhood of space.  Pioneer 10 is only about 15.4 billion kilometers away from us. That’s a stone’s throw in interstellar terms.  It will take millions of years to get out as far as our closest stellar neighbor, a mere 4.5 light years distant.  By the time anyone might find it, we could very well be extinct as a species.  In that time, even if we are  still around, our attitudes as a species may have changed hundreds of times.  It doesn’t matter what we thought 40 years ago or what we think today or what we might think in another century, all of these are minuscule in terms of interstellar space travel. These liberal idiots have to get the hell over themselves and remember what the point of sending vehicles into space at all is, to make contact with whatever alien life might be out there.  It is not to convince them that we’re too brain damaged to be bothered with, or that we deserve to be exterminated for the good of the interstellar community.  Let’s not let liberal stupidity infect another planet like it has ours.  We owe it to the universe to keep our insanity home.



23 thoughts on “Liberals Don’t Understand Space”

  1. Right when I start trying to convince myself that I am not a misanthrope, than this type of shit happens… Sigh… Typical human nonsense. ALIENS STAY CLEAR OF THIS CESSPOOL OF A PLACE NAMED EARTH AND ITS BRAIN-LESS INHABITANTS!!!

  2. “… remember what the point of sending vehicles into space at all is, to make contact with whatever alien life might be out there.”

    Wrong, as usual. Every single space probe we have sent into space was sent there for the purpose of exploring and learning about our solar system. Pioneer 10's mission was not to contact aliens elsewhere. The plaque was added only because we knew the spacecraft was on a trajectory that would take it out of the solar system, thus it might encounter some alien lifeforms in the very very distant future. Only five spacecraft, of the more than 200 sent into the solar system, were on trajectories that would eventually take them out of the solar system. Thus your statement is obviously false and you should have known this.

    1. I know we have to talk really slow for you because you're not that bright and are a pedantic troll, but nowhere did I say that was their only task. The fact that we're attaching plaques intended for discovery by aliens proves that. So please, take your pedantry elsewhere, nobody is at all impressed. We're all laughing at your stupidity.

      1. “…but nowhere did I say that was their only task..”

        Nor is there any place in my comment where I claimed that you did say it was the only reason. What I said is that sending spacecraft into space as a means to contact and impart information to aliens is not even one of the reasons we send them into space. If it were then more than just three of the more than 200 spacecraft humans have launched would have been set on a trajectory to send them out of the solar system and contained information about Earth for any aliens that might encounter one or more of these spacecraft in the future. But this is not the case. Only five of the spacecraft launched are on trajectories that have or will carry them out of the solar system. Only three of those five have information about Earth. If you examine the mission objectives listed for these spacecraft you will find no reference to contacting aliens as one of the mission objectives. Thus contacting aliens was not one of the reasons we sent these spacecraft. They were sent to explore and learn about our solar system. Because several of them were sent on trajectories to achieve this objective that would also take them out of the solar system, scientists thought let's put some info about Earth just in case they are found by aliens sometime in the future. But this was not one of the mission objectives of these spacecraft.

      2. If it was not your intent to claim that contacting aliens is the sole or primary objective of sending spacecraft into space then you should take a refresher course in grammar and sentence construction. You wrote: “… remember what the point of sending vehicles into space at all is, to make contact with whatever alien life might be out there.” This sentence is written in such a way that it implies you are saying that the reason we send them into space is to contact aliens. Since you make reference to no other possible mission objectives and you list only the one, it is reasonable to assume that you are claiming this to be either the only reason we send them into space or the primary reason. But as I have made clear contacting aliens is not even one of the reasons we have sent any spacecraft into space to date. You made as a factual claim that it is. I have established that as a factual claim this is incorrect.

      3. In any event, it is clear that you are not very good at articulating your thoughts. Your use of the phrase “at all” at the end of the first clause of the sentence I quoted implies that you think this is the only or the primary reason for doing so. This phrasing does not clearly state that you are offering this as only one of a number of reasons or that you are offering it as a secondary reason as opposed to a primary reason. (To repeat the point, it is neither a primary, secondary, tertiary, etc. reason.)

        You just can't bring yourself to acknowledge when you are wrong, or you have used phrasing that does not clearly state what you claim in later replies that you were saying, or that you haven't fully thought-out your position nor articulated it in an unambiguous manner before posting it. It's just easier to double-down and call me pedantic or whatever other insult comes to your mind, hoping that it is distracting enough to any others reading that they won't notice your error.

      4. Also, you have misused the word troll.

        “In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion,[3] often for their own amusement.” (Source:

        Nothing I said was inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic. My comments were replies to specific claims and/or statements you made. I made no effort to redirect the discussion to a different topic. I did not post my comments with the deliberate intent of provoking an emotional response, though it does seem to have had this effect on you. Surprising, since on your blog you are always bashing liberals for what you claim are emotional-based outbursts and statements. Yet, as we can see, you are not immune from getting emotional yourself. Also, my comment was not an attempt to disrupt normal on-topic discussion, since my remarks were in fact on-topic. Again, I commented on specific statements you made.

      5. “The fact that we're attaching plaques intended for discovery by aliens proves that.”

        Proves what? We attached a plaque to three out of more than 200 spacecraft, and to you this proves that contacting aliens is one of the mission objectives of the spacecraft we have sent into space? Or are you saying, as your word and sentence construction implies, that the fact we have attached a plaque to the Pioneer 10 and Voyager 1 and 2 spacecraft proves that this was only one of the mission objectives? If so, again you are wrong. Go read the mission objectives statements for each of the spacecraft we have launched, including the three that contain the plaques. You will find that not one of these mission objective statements lists contacting aliens as one of the mission objectives.

      6. You have four choices here. Ignore my reply, which is essentially a concession that you were wrong as I have argued here. Double-down and try again to defend your error by ignoring my facts and argument and simply calling me some other name or using some ableist slur. Offer a rebuttal that refutes my facts and argument and/or shows where I am wrong. Or acknowledge your error. (I am definitely not wagering that you will choose the last option, since you seem to think yourself incapable of making a mistake.)

        1. Are you autistic or just a chronic asshole? You seem to be very particular how people speak and you also seem to regard everything people say as a truth claim even if it is only an opinion. Even if the person is making a truth claim, why does it bother you so much? You do realize this is the internet, right? You should change your profile name to "The Grand Utopian Troll", "defender of truth, justice, and social cluelessness” to better reflect your temperament. Cheers. Oh…Crap…I fed the troll didn't I?

          1. Yeah, but it's okay. He's like this everywhere and nobody can stand him anywhere. He likes to nitpick and post a dozen replies to every post. I have no idea why. Normally, I just ignore him, just like everyone else does, but from time to time I make a mistake and respond, only to realize that there's no reasoning with a troll. So he just posts his silly posts and I roll my eyes and pretend he doesn't exist. It's easier that way.

          2. It's your blog of course; not my decision in the slightest, but have you ever considered blocking him from commenting or does that only work for those who don't have a profile?

          3. I could, I simply detest censorship and only do it to the worst of the worst. That's not to say I haven't considered it in his case, but so far, he's a minor annoyance at best and easily ignored.

          4. “He's like this everywhere and nobody can stand him anywhere.”

            You presume to speak for everyone do you?

          5. “He likes to nitpick and post a dozen replies to every post.”

            If correcting false or incorrect statements, challenging stupid and idiotic opinions, refuting poorly constructed arguments, and calling for evidence when none is offered are nitpicking, then I gladly plead guilty as charged. Again, you exaggerate with an incorrect claim so as to make a point. It is true that I do respond to many of your postings. But it is incorrect that I do this with everything you post. Go back and check your blog. You will find a sizable number of posts lacking any reply from me. As for the claim that I post a dozen replies to every post, this too is an exaggeration you know to be untrue. While I do often post multiple replies to some of your posts, it seldom reaches a dozen. Of course in this thread I have exceeded a dozen. But this does not make your statement that I always post a dozen replies accurate.

            It is curious that you never offered as a criticism the number of comments I wrote in the comment thread back when your favorite religious nut was posting and I would challenge him. The number of comments I write only seems to matter when I am critical of or disagreeing with you. Um, interesting? However, how many comments I make is an irrelevant point. You pointing this out does not constitute a rebuttal argument to the criticisms I offer.

          6. “…only to realize that there's no reasoning with a troll.”

            You call what you write in your postings and replies to my comments “reasoning.” LOL. And there you've done it again. Misused the word troll. I defined this term for you earlier and explained why this term does not apply to my comments. If I am a troll, then offer an argument as to just what about my comments constitutes trolling. What definition are you using for this term? Certainly not the one most widely accepted and used by others.

          7. “…I roll my eyes and pretend he doesn't exist. It's easier that way.”

            Well of course it is easier to ignore me, pretend I don't exist and not offer a rebuttal to my criticisms, to the evidence-based and fact-based arguments I offer. It's called intellectual laziness.

          8. I readily admit that I expect people to speak and write with clarity. I expect a writer to carefully choose words and construct sentences so that the thoughts being expressed do not produce confusion or misunderstanding. You think otherwise?

            I am able to distinguish between opinion and statements of fact. The sentence in question that is the focus of this exchange is a statement of fact, not opinion. But even if Cephus offered it as an opinion, it is, like any opinion, subject to challenge, criticism and refutation. As I demonstrated, whether it is an opinion or a claim of fact, it is incorrect.

          9. Why does it bother me that a person has offered as a statement of fact something that is actually false or incorrect? Why are you not bothered by this? Because it was posted on the internet, then it is okay to be wrong and it should go unchallenged or uncorrected? I can't help but wonder just what kind of a critical thinker are you?

            You think there IS something wrong with defending truth, accuracy, and justice? As for social cluelessness, I am assuming you mean social awkwardness or an inability to properly socially interact with others. But I can't be sure this is what you mean by this term. This is one of those phrases of which I spoke when I said I expect people to speak and write with clarity. Whatever you mean by this term, it is a rather odd thing to accuse someone of defending. I have no problem interacting with others. You may not like the way I do so, but if so that is your problem not mine. Certainly a person who is autistic (I am not) and thus has difficulty with what we call the social graces should not be ridiculed or mocked. This is a condition beyond their control. Mocking a person who has an intellectual disorder beyond their control is a form of bigotry and prejudice. I certainly hope that your remark about defending social cluelessness was not intended as bigotry or prejudice.

          10. Like Cephus, you too apparently have a comprehension problem where it concerns the concept of an internet troll. None of my comments were trollish as the term is typically defined and the concept understood. Of course, if you think someone expressing a view that disagrees with yours or pointing out your errors is being trollish then I can see the source of your error.

          11. Just what about my comments gives you the impression that I might be autistic? That you would think such a thing simply from what I have said here leads me to think that you don't actually understand autism. Do you hold some prejudice or bigoted attitude about person's with autism? If not, then why do you conjecture only from what I have written that I might be autistic? More importantly, why is it even a relevant possibility in this conversation? You are aware, are you not, that autism requires a diagnosis from a trained and licensed medical professional? Have you the appropriate credentials and training to even warrant such speculation? Finally, if I were autistic just what makes you think that you have any right to know this information about me? Should I conjecture about medical conditions you might have from what you have written?

            Your speculation about my possibly being autistic seems to reveal a callous disregard for those afflicted with this condition. I taught high school science for 22 years, and during that time I had students with Asperger Syndrome (a condition that is a part of the spectrum of conditions that fall under autism). Their condition is nothing to make light of, joke about, or treat with any kind or level of prejudice. I hope this is not your intent. But not knowing why you felt compelled to conjecture that I might be autistic leaves me uncertain about your attitude toward those afflicted with this condition.

          12. Whether I am or am not a chronic asshole is simply a matter of opinion, one you are of course free to hold. An opinion is, of course, no better than the asshole out of which it was plucked.

  3. "Liberals Don't Understand Space"

    Since ignorance knows no boundaries, I suppose there are some liberals, as well as conservatives, libertarians, socialists, etc. who don't understand space. This is not a problem – if indeed it is a problem – limited to liberals. In fact, I could name many many liberals who understand space considerably better than do you. I'll give you just a few. Neil deGrasse Tyson, Lawrence Krauss, Stephen Hawking. I would even be willing to wager that given my education in the sciences, even I understand it better than do you. There is nothing at all unreasonable about concerns some have over broadcasting our presence to the rest of the universe, nor about presenting information to possilbe intelligent aliens that more fully and accurately describes the life on this planet.

    You seem to think that any intelligent life out there must be benign and friendly. Perhaps it is. But this is not a foregone conclusion. Given our own bloody history, there is no reason not to consider the possibility that intelligent, space-faring lifeforms elsewhere in the galaxy are just as prone to the savagery and bloodletting that marks our own history as an intelligent species.

Leave a Reply to dogfightwithdogma Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Optionally add an image (JPG only)