Are conservatives anti-science?

Says you as you type on a computer and post on the internet...

 

We so a little knowledge that we can manufacture devices a few atoms wide, or that that average lifespan has doubled.

 

Your computer from 20 years ago would be laughed at today...

thanks for proving my point

 

science can explain how r****ded your post is

 

So you seem to be saying that conservatives have a line on science 20 or 100 years from now, eh?

Your opinions, which appear to come from 50 years ago, ARE laughed at today.

 

I always thought the anti-vaccination people were mostly democrats..so I looked it up - and it turns out that is correct.

Great article From USA Today - "If The GOP is anti-science, so are the Dems"

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news...emocrats-science-evolution-vaccine/50482856/1

Conservatives don't believe in:
Evolution
Climate change
Embryonic Stem Cell research

Liberals don't like:
Vaccinations
Nuclear Power
Genetically Modified Foods


All 6 of the above are supported by the majority of Scientists today

 

As opposed to what?

 

I think conservatives generally object to science being used and sometimes misused as a cudgel to extract political concessions. In so opposing politicized science, positions will generally polarize to the point where one is vulnerable to attack as anti-science.

I don't think many conservatives actually disbelieve climate change (if they did, there wouldn't be so many corporations preparing for it), but they don't like the policy recommendations from the left to combat it. From a rhetorical standpoint though, it's easier to deny the whole thing than to admit there's a problem but advocate a more moderate response.

And, I think it's interesting to see stem cell research here. I don't think anyone important has objected that embryonic stem cells were not efficacious. The argument is that their use is immoral, which isn't something science is equipped to speak to at all. Yet now science is being used as a cudgel here, saying that people who don't agree with the OP's moral position are now in opposition to science.

 

The point of science isn't to claim to know all the answers, but its the strive to find them. Yes science can't explain everything, but it doesn't claim to.

In 100 years some of what we think we know will be invalidated or expanded upon.

 

I've never understood the hate for vaccines, nuclear power, and GMOs.
GMOs especially.

 

txtony nailed it.

 

Nuclear power is easy to understand if you combine round-the-clock operation, fluctuating production in line with real-time pricing and the moral hazard of lax construction and maintenance with conventional energy plants and then apply those risks to the costs of meltdown and radiation.

 

Well it only took about 10 seconds before I started laughing at your post, so it would appear that science has the upper hand on you.

 

Good post. And, please, don't let this example of the "Dems are as bad as the Reps", to dissuade you from hating the republicans -- instead, hate them both. They are both responsible for the decreasing liberty in this country, the increasing disparity of wealth, and the fact that our education standards, health care standards, infrastructure levels and many other things are worsening and lagging behind much less prosperous nations.

 

Embryonic Stem Cell research is a moral issue. has nothing to do with science or scientists.

 

TIL that Michelle Bachmann is liberal.

 

Let's say the LEFT gives Science 10 billion a year
and the RIGHT gives them 2 billion a year

Which do you think Science will support

Rocket River
money changes everything

 

What is someone who is against all of it .. . . a INDEPENDENT? LOL

Seriously. . .there is only one Science or Religion they care about it is CAPITALISM

Most of these things you can follow the money
Those politicians for or against an item . . . follow the money flowing into his account

They make Adulter, lie and cheat but most will NOT go against sound Capitalistic practices. . . now THAT WOULD BE A SIN!!

Rocket River

 

Huh? So in your mind the Left already has preset views that climate change is happening and that evolution happened and they pay scientists to confirm that.

Quite sneaky of modern leftists to convince Darwin a 150 years ago to come up with a theory just so they can pay scientists now to confirm it.

You do understand that published science is peer reviewed by an international community? Further if it's all about money where is the money from encouraging energy conservation? For that matter there isn't that much money to be made from Evolution.

 

I don't hate anyone. But I dislike politicians on both far ends of the spectrum. For the Record, I support all of the above except Embryonic Stem Cell research. Adult Stem cell research has my full support though.