The left's war on science
We've been told conservatives don't believe in science and that there's a "Republican war on science."
But John Tierney, who's written about science for The New York Times for 25 years and now writes for the Manhattan Institute's City Journal, told me in my latest online video, "The real war on science is the one from the left."
Really? Conservatives are more likely to be creationists -- denying evolution.
"Right," says Tierney. "But creationism doesn't affect the way science is done."
What about President George W. Bush banning government funding of stem cell research?
"He didn't stop stem cell research," Tierney reminds me. "The government wouldn't fund it. It turned out that it really didn't matter much." Private funding continued and, so far, has not discovered much.
"People talk about this Republican war on science, but if you look around, my question is, where are the casualties? What scientists lost their jobs?" asks Tierney. "I can't find examples where the right wing stopped the progress of science, whereas you can look on the left and you see so many areas that are taboo to research."
Some research on genetically modified foods became taboo because of protests from the left. That may have prevented a second Green Revolution to feed Africa.
Scientists can't even talk about whether genes affect intelligence without being threatened by the left. Political scientists who continued to investigate the topic are screamed at on college campuses, the way Charles Murray, author of "The Bell Curve," has been.
Tierney adds, "The federal government stopped funding IQ research decades ago."
Likewise, researching gender differences is dangerous to your career.
"You can't talk about sexual differences between men and women, (although) it's OK if they favor women," laughs Tierney. "You can say men are more likely to commit crimes, but you can't suggest that there might be some sexual difference that might predispose men to be more interested in a topic."
Google fired engineer James Damore merely for suggesting that sex differences might explain why more men choose to work in tech.
"Damore just pointed out very basic scientific research about differences between the sexes," argues Tierney. "The experts in this, as soon as he published that memo, said, yes, he basically got the science right."
It's not as if women aren't doing well in life, says Tierney.
In universities, "women dominate virtually every extracurricular activity, but all the focus has been: 'Why aren't there more women physicists and mathematicians, and of course in the sports area, too?'" says Tierney. "There's this idea that they're being discriminated against, (but) there have been enormous studies of who gets grants, who gets tenure, who gets interviews for jobs, and women get preference."
However, one group does get discriminated against in colleges: conservatives.
"In the social sciences, Democrats outnumber Republicans by at least eight to one. In fields like sociology it's 44 to one. Students are more likely to be taught in sociology by a Marxist than by a Republican," says Tierney. "It's gotten worse and worse."
Why does this happen at colleges that claim they "treasure diversity"? Because people on the left believe diversity just means race and gender, not thought. And even schools that want some diverse thought reach a sort of political tipping point.
"Once an academic department gets a majority of people who are on the left, they start hiring people like themselves, and soon the whole department is that way," says Tierney. "They start to think that their opinions and that their interests are not only the norm, but the truth."
That's how we get "scientific" studies that "prove" conservatives are stupid.
One such study asked people if they agree with the statement "Earth has plenty of natural resources if we just learn how to develop them." The researcher called a "yes" answer an "irrational denial of science." But anyone who's studied economics knows the statement has repeatedly been proven true.
Finally, millions of people die of malaria today partly because many countries believed leftist junk science and needlessly banned DDT. Many were influenced by Rachel Carson's scientifically challenged book "Silent Spring."
There is a war on science. But most of it doesn't come from the right. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/04/11/john-stossel-lefts-war-on-science.html
Tags
Who is online
104 visitors
John Tierney is a crank who thrives on strawmen.
Complete horse pucky and dinosaur twaddle. Only an idiot would take this drivel seriously. Oh wait... wingers.
Long time no see Jen. I miss the SINners.
This twaddle doesn't even rate as well-written fiction.
No just just goofy shit for goofballs.
As a leftist I can say that I can't agree more. I mean I can not count all of my leftist friends who do not agree with the obvious science in the book of Genesis that shows that the world was created in seven days and that human being were created whole by a Gob in a Garden of Eden. I mean the science of it is just so obvious that any leftist who disputes it just makes me angry as hell. I mean they say we come from monkeys! If that was true, then why are there still monkeys! Science proves that we didn't come from monkeys right there!
Oh and don't get me started on Noah and the Ark and their ridiculous claims that Noah wasn't able to fit Dinosaurs on board too! Obviously science can easily explain that! It was a really big Ark!
I just want to know how they got the penguins to come up to the Ark. I'm sure that it was quite a trek for them little flippers and all. Were they alright about walking through the desert?
Come on Randy, you know as well as I do that it only took God 6 24 hour days, because obviously, even back then before the earth and sun were created God kept time in 24 hour segments, the seventh was for resting. Oh, and Noah was able to store 2 of every creature on earth in his little boat, and God didn't create any new creatures after the global flood that God apparently erased all evidence of... Scientists are so gullible with their tests and studies and repeatable experiments proving basic truths about the universe, what they forget is that God could have sped up or slowed down radioactive decay rates and Satan might have planted the fossils to trick mankind... /s
1 cubit = 1'6"
The ark was 300X50X30 cubits
Animals must have been a lot smaller then.
Noah only took 12 samples of each animal species DNA and then starting a breeding program when the waters subsided. It saved space on both animals and food.
He was 3000+ years ahead of his time.
Then why didn't he think to bring a seed bank if he was so smart? The bible says nothing about preserving plant life. Just think about all of the flora lost forever due to this oversight!
God told him about the flood, He didn't bother to mention that Noah should also save the plants.
Balderdash. DDT is used by many countries around the world for mosquito control. The problem with the incenticide is that insects quickly learn to adapt to it and it become in effective, especially where it is inappropriately applied or over used.
Balderdash again. The question of nature vs nurture goes on still to this very day.
I could go on.. but I don't have the time.
Thank you epistte for posting your article. It explains a lot.
Oh come now Perrie... that just too sciencey and stuff.
It is. That is why my students were terrified in my class. I actually made them think...
But then again...
"I know you are but what am I?" Now the left are the 'real' science deniers too? Pathetic, even by the seeder's incredibly pathetic standards.
Conservatives are more likely to be creationists -- denying evolution.
In my world, that blows your argument out of the water.
Pretty sure the author knows full well that the only time you get into trouble when pointing out the genetic differences between people is when you try to use that to justify discrimination. No one is denying the scientific facts/evidence that people are different at the genetic level and some mutations make people better at certain things than others.
Mamma always said bigotry is as bigotry does...
I actually live in the Heartland of America, XX...It's called Missouri and it's in the Ozarks. You, on the other hand don't live anywhere near the Heartland.
I don't feel that the ''Coastal Elites and Windy City Elites'' look down on me or show me any contempt or bigotry and I actually have a number of friends that live in the ''elite'' areas.
Perhaps it's only some of the people that live in the fantasy land of Jeffersonia that have this complex....Best they try to grab a hold of reality before it's to late for them.
Which is not where you live, remember?
Nonsense, us city folk LOVE our inbred, hillbilly redneck brothers and sisters!
Suck it up Tex, say, how was the muskrat/possum stew tonight?
Actually my friends on the coasts are jealous when they see my spread out here on the plains. Where do you keep coming up with all of these imaginary prejudices?
Now yer talkin' Tex, I do love beef, eat it constantly myself. Technically, I should be dead by now!
Strange, after reading your post, I suddenly have a hankering for andouille.
Didn't figure it was just possums, always thought it was whatever was handiest on the side of the road.
Just as with there being a five second rule on a dropped M&M, there is a five hour rule on road kill.
Connoisseurs always know.
Creationist ideology reject actual science and evolution, which is an accepted scientific theory. Creationism itself (and intelligent Design) lacks any supporting empirical evidence. Science is based on evidence.
Stem cell research has not been adequately supported or funded. There is no logical reason to not support and fund stem cell research. That's why other countries are making strides in the field while the U.S. still lags. Most opposition to stem cell research seems based on religious ideology.
The children and students of today, who may not receive the best scientific knowledge, understanding, or training. They may even reject sound scientific principles. Science should be supported and encouraged, and not subverted or discouraged, at all levels of education.
Based on what? Source? The lack o public understanding and support is the cause of opposition to GMC. But then, that's what happens when science isn't promoted or adequately taught to people: they remain ignorant and fearful. Opposition to GHC is a reflection of that. So is the anti-vaccination movement, BTW.
Remind me, which side tends to oppose social progress like abortion, same sex marriage, LGBT rights, equality, ect.?
What a load of total horseshit. I challenge the seeder to explain the scientific method .. including what a scientific theory is.
And no, I don't expect him to jump off a building to prove he doesn't get it.