Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Democrats are Anti-Science....pretty much just as often as Republicans....so why the misleading talking point that "Republicans are Anti-Science" and Democrats are not?
Fact is, both parties ignore science when it is convenient or gets in the way of personal beliefs AND both parties use science when it is convenient.
Democrats are about twice as likely to believe in ghosts, astrology, clairvoyants, magic spells, reincarnation, etc as Republicans are. Nancy Pelosi claims that ghosts of Susan B. Anthony, Alice Paul and others have talked to her.
Democrats ignore scientific studies that various costly feel-good programs have no effect.
Democrats support warnings against genetically modified foods and the California Democrats have officially endorsed it - despite the American Medical Association saying “there is no scientific justification for special labeling of bioengineered foods" and EVERY major scientific and governmental regulating agency saying that genetically modified foods are important.
Democrats are more likely to take alternative medicines that scientists and doctors say have no effect.
It was Democrats that pushed a link between vaccines and autism despite the lack of evidence. Obama in 2008 said he was suspicious that there was a connection saying that the science was not settled -- even that it had been for years. Thanks to Obama's position, the FDA switch to a vaccine with less of a certain chemical was partially to blame for a vaccine shortage in 2009.
Democrats are more likely to ignore scientists, which overwhelmingly favor medical testing of animals to save human lives and thus stalling science.
70% of scientists say we should use more nuclear energy, Democrats tend to disapprove of this and only favor it with 45%, while the Republican approval mirrors the scientist position.
Democrats bash Republicans for not believing in evolution (only 49% do), while ignoring that a very similar rate of Democrats also deny evolution (only 58% of Democrats believe in Evolution).
Democrats are Anti-Science....pretty much just as often as Republicans....so why the misleading talking point that "Republicans are Anti-Science" and Democrats are not?
The lunatic fringe of the right wing is now in control of your precious GOP. They're birthers, creationists, and flat earthers.
Quote:
Can we drop the gimmick that only 1 party is anti-science?
Washington DC is anti-science. If they weren't, we would have had the higgs boson back in the 70s, but nooooo "them thar science is stupid, it won't do anything." We would have nuclear fusion by now " that them thar is derp derpa fake science, snake oil stuff."
“there is no scientific justification for special labeling of bioengineered foods" and EVERY major scientific and governmental regulating agency saying that genetically modified foods are important.
I don't see the issue with the label, put it on the shelves next to the other more expensive products and let the consumer decide.
You know the Democrats are anti-science often...won't touch it, afraid to speak truthfully.
Then you accuse Republicans of being flat earthers...just another Obama false strawman argument. Democrats are creationists at practically the same rate as Republicans. You are correct about the birther nonsense...but Democrats have believed in equally nonsense things of Republicans in the past, but perhaps not in as big of numbers.
I can say both are anti-science at times...ironically, you yourself are anti-science as you ignore the facts that disagree with your foregone conclusion that can't stand the test of scrutiny and evidence.
Democrats are Anti-Science....pretty much just as often as Republicans....so why the misleading talking point that "Republicans are Anti-Science" and Democrats are not?
Fact is, both parties ignore science when it is convenient or gets in the way of personal beliefs AND both parties use science when it is convenient.
Democrats are about twice as likely to believe in ghosts, astrology, clairvoyants, magic spells, reincarnation, etc as Republicans are. Nancy Pelosi claims that ghosts of Susan B. Anthony, Alice Paul and others have talked to her.
I did not see the words Democrat and Republican in that entire article. Are you stereotyping certain religious groups as belonging to specific parties?
Democrats ignore scientific studies that various costly feel-good programs have no effect.
Link
Democrats support warnings against genetically modified foods and the California Democrats have officially endorsed it - despite the American Medical Association saying “there is no scientific justification for special labeling of bioengineered foods" and EVERY major scientific and governmental regulating agency saying that genetically modified foods are important.
Link that this is a "Democrat only" issue.
Democrats are more likely to take alternative medicines that scientists and doctors say have no effect.
Link
It was Democrats that pushed a link between vaccines and autism despite the lack of evidence. Obama in 2008 said he was suspicious that there was a connection saying that the science was not settled -- even that it had been for years. Thanks to Obama's position, the FDA switch to a vaccine with less of a certain chemical was partially to blame for a vaccine shortage in 2009.
Link to the whole thing. That story about the "FDA switch" shows that RealClear doesn't understand science. There was no switch whatsoever. Flu vaccines have long contained three viruses, except for the H1N1 vaccine in 2009, which had to be made separately b/c the other flu vaccine was already made! There was a trivalent flu vaccine available in 2009 as well. It was recommended that people get both. In 2010, H1N1 was incorporated into the trivalent vaccine. What a joke! AFAIK, no reputable scientific body "pushed" a link between vaccines and autism. Robert Kennedy Jr did, and apparently still believes so, but even Rolling Stone Magazine (a conservative mag, of course), disavowed him. Jenny McCarthy probably had more to do with the vaccine-autsim link that Robert Kennedy Jr.
Democrats are more likely to ignore scientists, which overwhelmingly favor medical testing of animals to save human lives and thus stalling science.
Link that scientists are "overwhelmingly in favor" of animal testing.
70% of scientists say we should use more nuclear energy, Democrats tend to disapprove of this and only favor it with 45%, while the Republican approval mirrors the scientist position.
Link.
Democrats bash Republicans for not believing in evolution (only 49% do), while ignoring that a very similar rate of Democrats also deny evolution (only 58% of Democrats believe in Evolution).
You should probably get your science information from somewhere other than "Real Clear Politics".
That article is filled with links.
What specifically do you disagree with from the article that I used?
Is it not anti-scientific to dismiss evidence based solely on a personal bias with no rationale towards the actual evidence.
P.S. It is not really a "science" article is it? It is a "political" article about scientific views of a party...saying things like factually the Democratic party of California endorsed this position, factually the top science organizations say their position is baseless and without evidence.....If there was a RCP article about public funding for a zoo, would you call that a biology or zoology article or a political article about a zoo?
P.P.S the author has a Ph.D. in microbiology and one of his employers is USAToday.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
