Why don't conservatives like science more?

gonzo8402

Star
Registered
Politics may play some role in the positive way the scientists surveyed judge the times. More than half of the scientists surveyed (55%) say they are Democrats, compared with 35% of the public. Fully 52% of the scientists call themselves liberals; among the public, just 20% describe themselves as liberals. Many of the scientists surveyed mentioned in their open-ended comments that they were optimistic about the Obama administration’s likely impact on science.

For its part, the public does not perceive scientists as a particularly liberal group. When asked whether they think of scientists as liberal, conservative or neither in particular, nearly two-thirds (64%) choose the latter option. Just 20% say they think of scientists as politically liberal. However, a majority of scientists (56%) do see members of their profession as liberal.

pew-science.gif


PEW
 

The Amerikkkan Idol

Star
Registered
Because science generally:

A: gets in the way of their often retarded fundamentalist beliefs, not realizing that even Einstein was a man of faith, but at the same time embraced science.

B: it gets in the way of the big business Republicans desire to make money, even while they kill everybody by polluting water, air, and food.

So in recap, half the Repubs believe Jesus hates science, the other half are just greedy bastards that hate that science proves they are destroyin the world.
 

actinanass

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
I believe in balance.

I can't put too much into science because science tends to not solve anything. It tends to give theories that can be disputed on the most part. That's my 2 cents...

BTW, I'm a conservative.
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Because science generally:

A: gets in the way of their often retarded fundamentalist beliefs, not realizing that even Einstein was a man of faith, but at the same time embraced science.

B: it gets in the way of the big business Republicans desire to make money, even while they kill everybody by polluting water, air, and food.

So in recap, half the Repubs believe Jesus hates science, the other half are just greedy bastards that hate that science proves they are destroyin the world.

So to sum it up, Republicans think government should be ideologically based rather than fact based.
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
I believe in balance.

I can't put too much into science because science tends to not solve anything. It tends to give theories that can be disputed on the most part. That's my 2 cents...

BTW, I'm a conservative.

This is so ridiculous I have no response.
 

actinanass

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
This is so ridiculous I have no response.

Ok if it's so ridiculous, why are people still debating the big bang theory?

Why are people still debating evolution?

Why are people still debating the mayan calender?

I can go on forever asking you questions about science. My point is, science only establish well thought out theories on situations. The theories are excepted as fact UNTIL evidence comes around, and dispute that theory. Of course, some theories will never be disputed. Like the "world is round" theory. However, the theories that do not get disputed is in the minority compared to most theories in modern science.
 

gonzo8402

Star
Registered
Ok if it's so ridiculous, why are people still debating the big bang theory?

Why are people still debating evolution?

Why are people still debating the mayan calender?

I can go on forever asking you questions about science. My point is, science only establish well thought out theories on situations. The theories are excepted as fact UNTIL evidence comes around, and dispute that theory. Of course, some theories will never be disputed. Like the "world is round" theory. However, the theories that do not get disputed is in the minority compared to most theories in modern science.

The debate is a means to an end. They're just trying to establish scientific laws...they all started as theories
 

ronmch20

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Because to do what science sometimes dictates oftentimes costs money and conservatives do not like anything that may cost them money, except military spending which in their shallow minds protects their money. :hmm:
 

actinanass

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Because to do what science sometimes dictates oftentimes costs money and conservatives do not like anything that may cost them money, except military spending which in their shallow minds protects their money. :hmm:

Correction GOVERNMENT SPENDING!!!!
 

Tazirai

Star
Registered
So to sum it up, Republicans think government should be ideologically based rather than fact based.

Basically. No matter how much Science FACT, you find, there will be those who cry false. Now I will say this though. Science is and will always be a Work in Progress simply, because as we get smarter. The old beliefs and Facts tend to change. Sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse.

However on Global Warming, the Facts are in, base don thousands of years of Physical and scientific evdence.

Conservatives confuse Climate Change and Global Warming. They are different.
 

ronmch20

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Correction GOVERNMENT SPENDING!!!!
Government spending derives from taxes and conservatives think they pay way more taxes than any other group, so in their mind the government is spending their money and they do not want it spent on any scientific initiative like curbing global warming.
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Ok if it's so ridiculous, why are people still debating the big bang theory?

Why are people still debating evolution?

Why are people still debating the mayan calender?

I can go on forever asking you questions about science. My point is, science only establish well thought out theories on situations. The theories are excepted as fact UNTIL evidence comes around, and dispute that theory. Of course, some theories will never be disputed. Like the "world is round" theory. However, the theories that do not get disputed is in the minority compared to most theories in modern science.

:lol::lol::lol:

Right wingers (conservatives) are still debating the laws of gravity, but ExxonMobile and Lockheed Martin are using science all the way to the bank!

You are beyond description, but unfortunately not too uncommon.


Hey actinanass, did men land on the moon?
 
Last edited:

actinanass

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
:lol::lol::lol:

Right wingers (conservatives) are still debating the laws of gravity, but ExxonMobile and Lockheed Martin are using science all the way to the bank!

You are beyond description, but unfortunately not too uncommon.


Hey actinanass, did maen land on the moon?

1. I don't know what maen is?

2. Exxon isn't saying "well this is the only way to get energy" either. They are, in fact, still searching for more affordable means to make energy. Keyword is AFFORDABLE.

3. Same goes for lock heed.

So, what's your point?

No one is saying that we shouldn't look at science at all. Oh wait, that's your ideology talking again huh THOUGHT?
 

da_monumental_1

LinuxGawd & BOFH
BGOL Investor
Because science generally:

A: gets in the way of their often retarded fundamentalist beliefs, not realizing that even Einstein was a man of faith, but at the same time embraced science.

B: it gets in the way of the big business Republicans desire to make money, even while they kill everybody by polluting water, air, and food.

So in recap, half the Repubs believe Jesus hates science, the other half are just greedy bastards that hate that science proves they are destroyin the world.

Albert Einstein's quote:

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

- Albert Einstein, letter to an atheist (1954), quoted in Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas & Banesh Hoffman

=========================================================

Though many scientists are left-leaning, most are aware scientific funding is historically higher under Republican administrations. Neil DeGrasse Tyson states it himself. He said that there is one mantra that is true with Republican led administrations.

"Science exploration and advancement is the primary economic engine of the United States and no Republican wants to die poor."

http://fora.tv/2009/02/04/Neil_deGrasse_Tyson_The_Pluto_Files

Go down to video 18 (Question 1)
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
1. I don't know what maen is?

2. Exxon isn't saying "well this is the only way to get energy" either. They are, in fact, still searching for more affordable means to make energy. Keyword is AFFORDABLE.

3. Same goes for lock heed.

So, what's your point?

No one is saying that we shouldn't look at science at all. Oh wait, that's your ideology talking again huh THOUGHT?

1. Men. Do you thing men landed on the moon?

2. The hell they aren’t they are funding obstructions to non fossil fuels.


3. Lockheed is a scientific corporation, without science no Lockheed.

My, point, like the medieval catholic church, which the right (conservatives) have so much in common, using the cloak of selective questioning of science when it suits them is similar to the catholic church in the European dark ages persecuting anyone claiming that earth was not the center of the universe because it questioned the churches power of absolute authority over the masses. You sir are medieval thinking.
 

Fuckallyall

Support BGOL
Registered
My 2 cents - mamy scientists are academians, and therefore live off the largesse of society, and are more likely to have a collectivist thought pattern. And those that don't lie in order to stay in the good grace of the rest. Science has a shit load of politics in it, just like the rest of society. See the AGW crowd for example.
 

actinanass

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
1. Men. Do you thing men landed on the moon?

2. The hell they aren’t they are funding obstructions to non fossil fuels.



3. Lockheed is a scientific corporation, without science no Lockheed.

My, point, like the medieval catholic church, which the right (conservatives) have so much in common, using the cloak of selective questioning of science when it suits them is similar to the catholic church in the European dark ages persecuting anyone claiming that earth was not the center of the universe because it questioned the churches power of absolute authority over the masses. You sir are medieval thinking.


Ok, you are officially nuts.

Acorns EVEN.....
 

Tazirai

Star
Registered

Garifuna

Star
Registered
Flip the script. It's not that conservatives don't like science; it's that a science education teaches one to think like a liberal (a free man).

The term liberal arts denotes a curriculum that imparts general knowledge and develops the student’s rational thought and intellectual capabilities, unlike the professional, vocational, technical curricula emphasizing specialization. The contemporary liberal arts comprise studying art, literature, languages, philosophy, politics, history, mathematics, and science. In classical antiquity, the liberal arts denoted the education proper to a free man (Latin: liber, “free”), unlike the education proper to a slave.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts
 

The Amerikkkan Idol

Star
Registered
Albert Einstein's quote:

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

- Albert Einstein, letter to an atheist (1954), quoted in Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas & Banesh Hoffman

=========================================================

Though many scientists are left-leaning, most are aware scientific funding is historically higher under Republican administrations. Neil DeGrasse Tyson states it himself. He said that there is one mantra that is true with Republican led administrations.

"Science exploration and advancement is the primary economic engine of the United States and no Republican wants to die poor."

http://fora.tv/2009/02/04/Neil_deGrasse_Tyson_The_Pluto_Files

Go down to video 18 (Question 1)

That's bullshit, Einstein used the word God to mean the universe as a whole. Pantheism or Deism as best.

Einstein WAS a man of faith, he just didn't worship a GOD. There is a difference. He was NOT an atheist and hated that atheists, just as much as religious people used him as an example. He thought that a lot of atheists were just people traumatized by their experiences.


Albert%20Einstein%20-%20Wikipedia%2C%20the%20free%20encyclopedia_1247697608383.jpeg
 

Dmain_Event

Star
Registered
Flip the script. It's not that conservatives don't like science; it's that a science education teaches one to think like a liberal (a free man).



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts

When you say liberal, you are talking in the old sense of the word. Today's liberals are actually opposite of that. They are more commonly called progressives. Todays conservatives are actually the truest liberals in the old sense of the word. Proggressives believe in positive rights as opposed to negative rights And so on and so forth.
Conservatives aren't against Science. That is a loaded phrase. You are probably referring to the current global warming debate. Liberals say man made Global warming is true, argument over (even though temperatures have been dropping over the last 10 years, other planets in the solar system appeared to have warmed during our last warming cycle implicating the sun{no way:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:} and temperature fluctuations appear to be a natural phenomenon). Conservatives look at both sides of the argument and conclude, It appears as though Man made global Warming isn't real (for the reasons I stated). I would get into it but I am busy looking at porn.
 

actinanass

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
When you say liberal, you are talking in the old sense of the word. Today's liberals are actually opposite of that. They are more commonly called progressives. Todays conservatives are actually the truest liberals in the old sense of the word. Proggressives believe in positive rights as opposed to negative rights And so on and so forth.
Conservatives aren't against Science. That is a loaded phrase. You are probably referring to the current global warming debate. Liberals say man made Global warming is true, argument over (even though temperatures have been dropping over the last 10 years, other planets in the solar system appeared to have warmed during our last warming cycle implicating the sun{no way:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:} and temperature fluctuations appear to be a natural phenomenon). Conservatives look at both sides of the argument and conclude, It appears as though Man made global Warming isn't real (for the reasons I stated). I would get into it but I am busy looking at porn.

They will not listen to you dude...I've been trying to tell them..
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
When you say liberal, you are talking in the old sense of the word. Today's liberals are actually opposite of that. They are more commonly called progressives. Todays conservatives are actually the truest liberals in the old sense of the word. Proggressives believe in positive rights as opposed to negative rights And so on and so forth.
Conservatives aren't against Science. That is a loaded phrase. You are probably referring to the current global warming debate. Liberals say man made Global warming is true, argument over (even though temperatures have been dropping over the last 10 years, other planets in the solar system appeared to have warmed during our last warming cycle implicating the sun{no way:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:} and temperature fluctuations appear to be a natural phenomenon). Conservatives look at both sides of the argument and conclude, It appears as though Man made global Warming isn't real (for the reasons I stated). I would get into it but I am busy looking at porn.

There you go again. Using the right wing political benchmark to try and disparage the term liberal. Liberals and Progressives are two different philosophies although liberals and progressives share a lot in common. Teddy Roosevelt was a republican and a progressive, but not necessarily a liberal. He established the National Park, the FDA and enacted many anti monopolist laws however he did not follow up on many of civil rights issues he promised during his campaigns. He actually coined the term in one of his speeches. I could post it, but some don’t like to read more than two sentences.

Conservatives aren't against Science. That is a loaded phrase. You are probably referring to the current global warming debate.

No the references was to:

Stem Cell Research
Creationism being taught in schools right next to and emphasized over evolution
Man's negative influence on the environment

Are there any others?

Liberals say man made Global warming is true, argument over

You know the so called “Global Warming debate,” is playing out politically similar to how the implantation of safety standards on automobiles played out during the 1960s and 1970s. Prior to government mandating safety standards on all automobiles sold in the United States, the automobile industry swore that those requirements would ruin the auto industry. No one would buy safety as a selling point. The customer wants shiny chrome, powerful engines and trendy styling year after year, not seat belts, safer bumpers and a safer automobile interior. They said it would raise the price of cars to such a level that they manufactures could not make sufficient profits to sustain their business. They said lets just go slow and let the marketplace determine what was needed. Well after thousands of lives were saved and millions of injuries prevented or lessened, auto industry executives admitted that they came screaming and fighting to the “safety table” and now they highlight the safety advances in their vehicles during marketing campaigns. The same was true for pollution standards on automobiles. Business main goal, actually the only goal is to turn a profit. In a democracy, the government’s main goal is to serve the people.

Figure out the conclusion to this statement in your discussions!
 

Partial_Mathers

Star
Registered
Albert Einstein was a fraud and a thief, there's many books and documents release proving he stole the majority of his ideas...

Liberals and Conservatives are just labels for the same criminal class that sold your country out from under you http://www.rense.com/general86/nomis.htm . Clinton signed over our National Parks to the United Nations and gave our nuclear secrets to socialist China and North Korea, Bush gave nuclear secrets to theocratic Saudi Arabia and India, neither party made a peep or prosecuted them...It's all a psyop...Operation Mockingbird
 

actinanass

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
There you go again. Using the right wing political benchmark to try and disparage the term liberal. Liberals and Progressives are two different philosophies although liberals and progressives share a lot in common. Teddy Roosevelt was a republican and a progressive, but not necessarily a liberal. He established the National Park, the FDA and enacted many anti monopolist laws however he did not follow up on many of civil rights issues he promised during his campaigns. He actually coined the term in one of his speeches. I could post it, but some don’t like to read more than two sentences.



No the references was to:

Stem Cell Research
Creationism being taught in schools right next to and emphasized over evolution
Man's negative influence on the environment

Are there any others?



You know the so called “Global Warming debate,” is playing out politically similar to how the implantation of safety standards on automobiles played out during the 1960s and 1970s. Prior to government mandating safety standards on all automobiles sold in the United States, the automobile industry swore that those requirements would ruin the auto industry. No one would buy safety as a selling point. The customer wants shiny chrome, powerful engines and trendy styling year after year, not seat belts, safer bumpers and a safer automobile interior. They said it would raise the price of cars to such a level that they manufactures could not make sufficient profits to sustain their business. They said lets just go slow and let the marketplace determine what was needed. Well after thousands of lives were saved and millions of injuries prevented or lessened, auto industry executives admitted that they came screaming and fighting to the “safety table” and now they highlight the safety advances in their vehicles during marketing campaigns. The same was true for pollution standards on automobiles. Business main goal, actually the only goal is to turn a profit. In a democracy, the government’s main goal is to serve the people.

Figure out the conclusion to this statement in your discussions!

On the Global Warming/car safety comparison, there was establish proof that we needed to make safer cars. It's way easier to make a car, that everyone wants to drive, and make it safer in the process. The only way that you can make everyone drive a more fuel efficient car is to make the situation better in the market for a such thing. Meaning, either make a way to higher the cost of fuel *basically cap and trade, and the unwillingness to drill for oil*, or not sell cars that people want to drive at a decent price anymore. Either way they do it, if the will of the people is against this, it will not work.

So, to say this debate is just like the Car Safety debate is basically APPLES AND ORANGES. It's easier to say "hey keep making the same cars, but just make them safer", than "quit making the cars you are making because we don't like them".
 

Greed

Star
Registered
So do men dislike educating children since most teachers are women?

One of black people's worse traits is the tendency to think like politicians all the time as if you have the luxury to be as lazy a thinker as they are.

This stupid thread is a great example of why black don't have their priorities straight and stay at the bottom of the economic and social ladders.

Idiot logic is rampant.
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
So do men dislike educating children since most teachers are women?

One of black people's worse traits is the tendency to think like politicians all the time as if you have the luxury to be as lazy a thinker as they are.

This stupid thread is a great example of why black don't have their priorities straight and stay at the bottom of the economic and social ladders.

Idiot logic is rampant.

One of black people's worse traits is the tendency to think like politicians all the time as if you have the luxury to be as lazy a thinker as they are.


0.jpg

tumblr_lw4cdxqRAQ1r59i9yo1_500.jpg
 

Greed

Star
Registered
Typical politician response. You're either with us or against us. Nothing less from trollone.
 
Top