Compared to other groups, conservatives have least confidence in science

[Dot Com]

What's especially hilarious is if you go through these threads, Republicans go on about the US having so much oil, we just have to develop the technology to make developing those sources feasible.

Do they understand who develops that technology? Apparently not.

The same with, well, just about everything. They seem to suggest that scientists do nothing, but however new technologies are developed, it must be someone besides "scientists".

You know how you can tell when Derp is lying?

He posts.

Nice AV daveman

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Don't make me go look.

I suspect that 6% of scientists being Republican is a tad high. Though I'm not sure. Seems 94% of scientists believe in evolution. Notice how those numbers fit together.

Go look.

In fact (pun intended) I will make it easy for you.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tf-GzlzU7M&feature=relmfu"]inFact: Ghost Hunting - YouTube[/ame]

Ghost hunting? Zany.

Tell that to the Parapsychology Association, only 6% of them are Republican, you should get along great.

 

[daveman]

Were you also defending some guy who debunks science, saying he's a scientist? The guy had studied computer science in at a university in Utah. He studied television and wrote fiction? And you defended those "credentials"? That was you, right?

No, I was defending a guy who debunks ghosts and psychics. I wasn't aware those are sciences, unless you are a member of the AAAS, which is only 6% Republican.

Don't make me go look.

I suspect that 6% of scientists being Republican is a tad high. Though I'm not sure. Seems 94% of scientists believe in evolution. Notice how those numbers fit together.

Are you trying to make the laughable case that there are NO Republicans who believe in evolution?

Because that's absurdly wrong.

It's as absurdly wrong as claiming a polluted Chinese river is in Texas.

It's as absurdly wrong as saying The Onion is a serious news outlet.

It's as absurdly wrong as claiming the South Park guys wrote a serious musical about Mormonism.

It's as absurdly wrong as you.

 

[daveman]

What's especially hilarious is if you go through these threads, Republicans go on about the US having so much oil, we just have to develop the technology to make developing those sources feasible.

Do they understand who develops that technology? Apparently not.

The same with, well, just about everything. They seem to suggest that scientists do nothing, but however new technologies are developed, it must be someone besides "scientists".

You know how you can tell when Derp is lying?

He posts.

Which part is the lie? Be specific. I'm waiting.

"Republicans go on about the US having so much oil, we just have to develop the technology to make developing those sources feasible.

"Do they understand who develops that technology? Apparently not.

"The same with, well, just about everything. They seem to suggest that scientists do nothing, but however new technologies are developed, it must be someone besides 'scientists'."

All that. That's the lie.

 

[Dragon]

As is common, we see here displayed an inability to understand the meaning of statistics. A statistic that says "X% of Republicans have no confidence in science" means that there are literally NO Republicans who believe in science, only if X=100. Otherwise, it says right out there that SOME Republicans -- even if it's a pathetically small percentage -- DO believe in science. I mean, if 99% of Republicans don't believe in science, that means that 1% of them DO believe in science. Right? Right. So the existence of some Republicans who do believe in science in no way refutes the statistic.

Now of course the percentage of science-phobic Republicans in reality is a good deal lower than 99%, and it seems to me that it can just about all be accounted for by the fact that nearly all fundamentalist Christians and AGW deniers are Republicans, and these two groups are most likely to be anti-science, the one because science includes evolution, and the other because scientists overwhelmingly believe in AGW. Are there Republicans who are neither fundamentalist Christians nor AGW deniers? Yes, there are. And those Republicans who fall into neither of these groups are likely to be those Republicans who, according to the statistics quoted early in this thread, are NOT anti-science.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

As is common, we see here displayed an inability to understand the meaning of statistics. A statistic that says "X% of Republicans have no confidence in science" means that there are literally NO Republicans who believe in science, only if X=100. Otherwise, it says right out there that SOME Republicans -- even if it's a pathetically small percentage -- DO believe in science. I mean, if 99% of Republicans don't believe in science, that means that 1% of them DO believe in science. Right? Right. So the existence of some Republicans who do believe in science in no way refutes the statistic.

Now of course the percentage of science-phobic Republicans in reality is a good deal lower than 99%, and it seems to me that it can just about all be accounted for by the fact that nearly all fundamentalist Christians and AGW deniers are Republicans, and these two groups are most likely to be anti-science, the one because science includes evolution, and the other because scientists overwhelmingly believe in AGW. Are there Republicans who are neither fundamentalist Christians nor AGW deniers? Yes, there are. And those Republicans who fall into neither of these groups are likely to be those Republicans who, according to the statistics quoted early in this thread, are NOT anti-science.

As is common here, what we have is a complete inability of some people to fucking read. I posted the actual question that was asked on the survey, and everyone ignored it.

 

[chichi]

Science is supposed to be unbiased and based on fact.

I hate how many people have added political charges to it. Why conservatives are more likely to distrust science should have no bearing on the facts that science brings to light. No political motives should.

__________________
Citizen Cool

 

[rdean]

Science is supposed to be unbiased and based on fact.

I hate how many people have added political charges to it. Why conservatives are more likely to distrust science should have no bearing on the facts that science brings to light. No political motives should.

__________________
Citizen Cool

The right has political motives because science threatens their "mystical chants and incantations".

 

[Peach]

Science is supposed to be unbiased and based on fact.

I hate how many people have added political charges to it. Why conservatives are more likely to distrust science should have no bearing on the facts that science brings to light. No political motives should.

__________________
Citizen Cool

The right has political motives because science threatens their "mystical chants and incantations".

Where in the hell did you get that conclusion from?

 

[rdean]

No, I was defending a guy who debunks ghosts and psychics. I wasn't aware those are sciences, unless you are a member of the AAAS, which is only 6% Republican.

Don't make me go look.

I suspect that 6% of scientists being Republican is a tad high. Though I'm not sure. Seems 94% of scientists believe in evolution. Notice how those numbers fit together.

Are you trying to make the laughable case that there are NO Republicans who believe in evolution?

Because that's absurdly wrong.

It's as absurdly wrong as claiming a polluted Chinese river is in Texas.

It's as absurdly wrong as saying The Onion is a serious news outlet.

It's as absurdly wrong as claiming the South Park guys wrote a serious musical about Mormonism.

It's as absurdly wrong as you.

Whatever your political affiliation, you have an almost mystical power to make up dialog and then attack someone who never said those things for having the moronic positions you simply made up out of thin air. You almost have to step back in awe and wonder, "Did the electro shock take, or didn't it". From the amount of drool, I kinda believe it did.

 

[rdean]

As is common, we see here displayed an inability to understand the meaning of statistics. A statistic that says "X% of Republicans have no confidence in science" means that there are literally NO Republicans who believe in science, only if X=100. Otherwise, it says right out there that SOME Republicans -- even if it's a pathetically small percentage -- DO believe in science. I mean, if 99% of Republicans don't believe in science, that means that 1% of them DO believe in science. Right? Right. So the existence of some Republicans who do believe in science in no way refutes the statistic.

Now of course the percentage of science-phobic Republicans in reality is a good deal lower than 99%, and it seems to me that it can just about all be accounted for by the fact that nearly all fundamentalist Christians and AGW deniers are Republicans, and these two groups are most likely to be anti-science, the one because science includes evolution, and the other because scientists overwhelmingly believe in AGW. Are there Republicans who are neither fundamentalist Christians nor AGW deniers? Yes, there are. And those Republicans who fall into neither of these groups are likely to be those Republicans who, according to the statistics quoted early in this thread, are NOT anti-science.

When people support leaders who have an "anti science" agenda, does it really matter what they personally believe?

 

[rdean]

Science is supposed to be unbiased and based on fact.

I hate how many people have added political charges to it. Why conservatives are more likely to distrust science should have no bearing on the facts that science brings to light. No political motives should.

__________________
Citizen Cool

The right has political motives because science threatens their "mystical chants and incantations".

Where in the hell did you get that conclusion from?

What else could it be?

 

[daveman]

Don't make me go look.

I suspect that 6% of scientists being Republican is a tad high. Though I'm not sure. Seems 94% of scientists believe in evolution. Notice how those numbers fit together.

Are you trying to make the laughable case that there are NO Republicans who believe in evolution?

Because that's absurdly wrong.

It's as absurdly wrong as claiming a polluted Chinese river is in Texas.

It's as absurdly wrong as saying The Onion is a serious news outlet.

It's as absurdly wrong as claiming the South Park guys wrote a serious musical about Mormonism.

It's as absurdly wrong as you.

Whatever your political affiliation, you have an almost mystical power to make up dialog and then attack someone who never said those things for having the moronic positions you simply made up out of thin air. You almost have to step back in awe and wonder, "Did the electro shock take, or didn't it". From the amount of drool, I kinda believe it did.

Oh, so now we're playing "Derp didn't say what he said".

Because, you know, you did indeed say all those things.

Man up and admit it.

But you lack the requisite parts to man up, don't you, Engineer of Womyn's Studies?