R
rdean
Guest
No holds barred critique of mainstream Republicans and Democrats on their views of "science". Ronald Bailey is a famous conservative who voted twice for Bush. He identifies himself as a Libertarian and spent most his his career in denial whether man has influenced climate change.
He has spent years writing for "reason dot com" (Free Minds and Free Markets)
Are Republicans or Democrats More Anti-Science? - Reason.com
A fight has broken out in the blogosphere over whether Team Blue or Team Red is more anti-science. Microbiologist Alex Berezow, editor of RealClearScience, struck the first blow in the pages of USA Today. "For every anti-science Republican that exists," he wrote, "there is at least one anti-science Democrat. Neither party has a monopoly on scientific illiteracy."
Berezow acknowledged that a lot prominent Republican politicians includingwould-be presidential candidatesdeny biological evolution, are skeptical of the scientific consensus on man-made global warming, and oppose research using human embryonic stem cells. As evidence for Democratic anti-science intransigence, Berezow argued that progressives tend to be more anti-vaccine, anti-biotechnology when it comes to food, anti-biomedical research involving tests on animals, and anti-nuclear power.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's an interesting read, but some (like me) might consider "denial of evolution and climate change" a "false equivalency" to concerns about "engineered food and wastes from nuclear power plants". The left isn't saying that "engineered foods and nuclear power plants don't exist". But that's part of the debate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confessions of an Alleged ExxonMobil Whore - Reason.com
He also writes about his evolving position on climate change. He was one of the first famous early "deniers". Having written such books as, "Eco-Scam: The False Prophets of Ecological Apocalypse".
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And he slams Democrats:
An initiative mandating that foods containing genetically modified organisms carry warning labels has made it onto the ballot in California. Proposition 37, the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act initiative, is an anti-science campaign that flies in the face of an overwhelming scientific consensus that genetically modified foods are safe and healthy. Corporate sponsors are working closely with unaccountable special interest groups in a disinformation campaign designed to frighten and confuse voters.
California Initiative Puts Profit Ahead of Science - Reason.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
His paper on evolution is amazing:
However, the longer I listened the clearer it became that creationism is not about science. It's about morality. Specifically, creationists worry that biological evolution undermines people's moral beliefs, leading to lawlessness, family breakdown, homosexuality, pornography, and abortion. The real heart of creationism is existential dread.
Philip Bell, former British cancer researcher and now fulltime creationist, in his talk "Ape Men, 'Missing Links' and the Bible," explains, "If Adam is your ancestor then you were created specially and have a purpose in life. If evolution is true, we are descended from ape-like animals with no morality, no aesthetic sensibility and no soul." If evolution were true, Bell tells the conferees, then "you would have no purpose for your existence."
Creation Summer Camp - Reason.com
It gives the rights views on creationism an entirely different perspective. It's not about the science, it's the question of "if we weren't created to have a purpose, then we have no purpose" to put it in simplistic terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So who does he think is more anti science? You'll have to read it to find out. At least you will have to review his reasoning. He doesn't spare either side.
He has spent years writing for "reason dot com" (Free Minds and Free Markets)
Are Republicans or Democrats More Anti-Science? - Reason.com
A fight has broken out in the blogosphere over whether Team Blue or Team Red is more anti-science. Microbiologist Alex Berezow, editor of RealClearScience, struck the first blow in the pages of USA Today. "For every anti-science Republican that exists," he wrote, "there is at least one anti-science Democrat. Neither party has a monopoly on scientific illiteracy."
Berezow acknowledged that a lot prominent Republican politicians includingwould-be presidential candidatesdeny biological evolution, are skeptical of the scientific consensus on man-made global warming, and oppose research using human embryonic stem cells. As evidence for Democratic anti-science intransigence, Berezow argued that progressives tend to be more anti-vaccine, anti-biotechnology when it comes to food, anti-biomedical research involving tests on animals, and anti-nuclear power.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's an interesting read, but some (like me) might consider "denial of evolution and climate change" a "false equivalency" to concerns about "engineered food and wastes from nuclear power plants". The left isn't saying that "engineered foods and nuclear power plants don't exist". But that's part of the debate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confessions of an Alleged ExxonMobil Whore - Reason.com
He also writes about his evolving position on climate change. He was one of the first famous early "deniers". Having written such books as, "Eco-Scam: The False Prophets of Ecological Apocalypse".
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And he slams Democrats:
An initiative mandating that foods containing genetically modified organisms carry warning labels has made it onto the ballot in California. Proposition 37, the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act initiative, is an anti-science campaign that flies in the face of an overwhelming scientific consensus that genetically modified foods are safe and healthy. Corporate sponsors are working closely with unaccountable special interest groups in a disinformation campaign designed to frighten and confuse voters.
California Initiative Puts Profit Ahead of Science - Reason.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
His paper on evolution is amazing:
However, the longer I listened the clearer it became that creationism is not about science. It's about morality. Specifically, creationists worry that biological evolution undermines people's moral beliefs, leading to lawlessness, family breakdown, homosexuality, pornography, and abortion. The real heart of creationism is existential dread.
Philip Bell, former British cancer researcher and now fulltime creationist, in his talk "Ape Men, 'Missing Links' and the Bible," explains, "If Adam is your ancestor then you were created specially and have a purpose in life. If evolution is true, we are descended from ape-like animals with no morality, no aesthetic sensibility and no soul." If evolution were true, Bell tells the conferees, then "you would have no purpose for your existence."
Creation Summer Camp - Reason.com
It gives the rights views on creationism an entirely different perspective. It's not about the science, it's the question of "if we weren't created to have a purpose, then we have no purpose" to put it in simplistic terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So who does he think is more anti science? You'll have to read it to find out. At least you will have to review his reasoning. He doesn't spare either side.
