Do Republicans see any need for scientists?

[Muhammed]

From their comments, it's questionable. They think scientists just get government money but don't really do anything of importance?

You are a very feeble-minded and easily brainwashed idiot.

To demonstrate evidence of my hypothesis, I request that you explain to the forum, exactly how you came to your conclusion.

Go for it, low IQ scum.

 

[whitehall]

Maybe the crazy left doesn't understand the difference between "scientists" who work in the private sector and "scientists" who depend on grants from skewed data related to "global warming"

 

[WheelieAddict]

Think about what science tells us. According to science, mankind did not appear on this planet wholly formed like a potted geranium. Mankind actually evolved like all other forms of life. Science tells us that mankind is capable of messing up this planet, our one and only planet. Sometimes making bushels of money without regard of the environmental consequences can be bad. Science tells us that homosexuality is not a mere lifestyle choice, but a condition that appears in other life forms and is embedded at birth like eye color or race.

That's a bitch for Conservatives to accept. Science refutes so many of their core beliefs.

Their religious cult like beliefs. Trump, a known philanderer with an immigrant wife who was in porn is somehow a picture of perfection to evangelical "christians". They are pretty much a cult/will believe any bs.
Fake people with a fake religion. These morons think its ok if you scam people out of money if you "repent".

Not a picture of perfection. Just better than a democrat. Judging from this nonsense less of a liar as well.

^the cult. Any excuse will do, weather its fact or fiction doesn't matter anymore.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

If conservatives were in control, STEM would get more funding because they would take all funding away from the humanities and social sciences and give it all to STEM.

Like Pol Pot. He'd get his henchmen to say "all teachers come forwards, we need you to do important work" and take them off to be shot. He didn't want anyone smarter than he was, and he wasn't that smart. My last boss was the same. The only people who'd survive were the ones who licked ass all the time and never made themselves look good.

If you've read the conservatives' posts over the years, most consider themselves very knowledgeable in all fields. They are confident they can hold their own in any debate with experts in any field. Science, economics, military strategy, political science, the list is long, and in any discourse in which they participate, facts take a backseat to their right wing talking points.

Conservatives typically decry education and denounce individuals and entire groups with advanced degrees, as elitist. It is often the case that conservatives lack the ability for analytical thought, which is why most prefer to let their clergy and political leaders govern what ideologies they hold. These ideologies are typically set at an early age and are nearly impossible for the individual conservative to escape. It leaves analytical thought and reasoning forever out of reach for these people.

As you state, such people hate those they realize are more intelligent and possess more knowledge, which is one reason right-wingers fight to keep wages low. Helping hold back those with superior intellects and those who excel beyond the limitations of the right-wingers' abilities is one reason they like to see the fat cats’ unethical business practices cheat average Americans.

Why else do conservatives fight to elect legislators who pass laws to increase the fat cats’ rights to exploit workers, cheat consumers, and protect corporate profits through deregulation. It is beyond reason why conservatives want Big Business to have the right to poison the air and water we need to sustain life.

It is not uncommon for employees who actually earn their income through skill, knowledge, and contributions to the success of their companies to be let go because they make those in higher positions, or even the owner himself (or herself) feel inferior.

Conservatism is defined as: dislike of change or new ideas in a particular area(s). While liberalism is defined as: belief in the value of social and political change in order to achieve progress.

It is easy to see why conservatives hate liberals, conservatism demands stagnation, and that is the death of any society. Consistent progress and adaptation guarantee survival. Like it or not, this is true for all living things, and societies.



.

.

"Conservatives typically decry education and denounce individuals and entire groups with advanced degrees, as elitist."

No, conservatives are against government funding for people to get advanced degrees in useless and toxic fields, otherwise known as the social "sciences". Study STEM, a profession such as law, or a trade or get the heck out of school and get to work.

"As you state, such people hate those they realize are more intelligent and possess more knowledge, which is one reason right-wingers fight to keep wages low. Helping hold back those with superior intellects and those who excel beyond the limitations of the right-wingers' abilities is one reason"

Republicans fight to keep the minimum wage from being increased to a ridiculous amount. How is that holding people with superior intellects back?

How can you have democrat support of STEM courses when democrats believe that math is racist?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Think about what science tells us. According to science, mankind did not appear on this planet wholly formed like a potted geranium. Mankind actually evolved like all other forms of life. Science tells us that mankind is capable of messing up this planet, our one and only planet. Sometimes making bushels of money without regard of the environmental consequences can be bad. Science tells us that homosexuality is not a mere lifestyle choice, but a condition that appears in other life forms and is embedded at birth like eye color or race.

That's a bitch for Conservatives to accept. Science refutes so many of their core beliefs.

Their religious cult like beliefs. Trump, a known philanderer with an immigrant wife who was in porn is somehow a picture of perfection to evangelical "christians". They are pretty much a cult/will believe any bs.
Fake people with a fake religion. These morons think its ok if you scam people out of money if you "repent".

Not a picture of perfection. Just better than a democrat. Judging from this nonsense less of a liar as well.

^the cult. Any excuse will do, weather its fact or fiction doesn't matter anymore.

Proud to be a member of the cult of realism. Thank God for President Trump. Long may he serve.

 

[MoonPie]

We just don't pretend science is something everyone can just vote on. Science is fact,not consensus.

Not based on what I've read. If you're unpopular or unknown and have an answer that contradicts the consensus view, good luck getting published.

Wouldn't that suggest that "consensus" can often hide the truth?

And that we shouldn't make life-altering, $100 Trillion Dollar, inalienable rights destroying decisions (like the one scientist who suggested suspending democracy to save us all) based on "consensus" and the need to immediately act on the sketchy, unproved, speculative-at-best alleged negative consequences such "consensus" allegedly suggests?

NOBODY can accuse me of being anything BUT a science guy. My issue is not whether there is a problem. It's the bullshit about the world ending in 12 years, when reality suggests a small loss of livable coastline and some agriculture strain from drought. We certainly shouldn't immediately chop off our own dicks to save our lives from a "life threatening disease", only to find out the worst-case scenario was some tender tenders and a cure as simple as some lotion and a nudie mag.

But, they almost pulled off the dick-chop con job (Cap and Trade).

.

Yes, they can and I believe they often do hide the truth. But more often it isn't on purpose, they just follow along with what everyone else is saying. They need funding for their projects too and no one wants to swim against the current.

Who has $100 trillion?? Maybe these fine people?

Google summit on climate change attended by stars in private jets, mega yachts slammed as 'hypocritical'

If we're going to spend $100 trillion, or even $1 trillion, we should probably be absolutely sure of the causes behind climate change. I'm guessing we shouldn't make any mistakes As it is, science isn't sure why the bees are dying. There are numerous possible causes. Plus, there's the problem of the 26 genders. DNA says there are only 2 genders. Are geneticists wrong? OMG how can we trust scientists about climate change when they're so very wrong about something as simple as gender?!

 

[WheelieAddict]

Think about what science tells us. According to science, mankind did not appear on this planet wholly formed like a potted geranium. Mankind actually evolved like all other forms of life. Science tells us that mankind is capable of messing up this planet, our one and only planet. Sometimes making bushels of money without regard of the environmental consequences can be bad. Science tells us that homosexuality is not a mere lifestyle choice, but a condition that appears in other life forms and is embedded at birth like eye color or race.

That's a bitch for Conservatives to accept. Science refutes so many of their core beliefs.

Their religious cult like beliefs. Trump, a known philanderer with an immigrant wife who was in porn is somehow a picture of perfection to evangelical "christians". They are pretty much a cult/will believe any bs.
Fake people with a fake religion. These morons think its ok if you scam people out of money if you "repent".

Not a picture of perfection. Just better than a democrat. Judging from this nonsense less of a liar as well.

^the cult. Any excuse will do, weather its fact or fiction doesn't matter anymore.

Proud to be a member of the cult of realism. Thank God for President Trump. Long may he serve.

^see

 

[SmokeALib]

From their comments, it's questionable. They think scientists just get government money but don't really do anything of importance?

Troll thread. Please remove.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Conservatives only accept scientists whose research can be used to develop new and better ways to make war.

You do realize that more Americans have died in war because of Democrats ?

 

[lennypartiv]

Liberals just want to use fake news like this to tell us to driver smaller cars.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

From their comments, it's questionable. They think scientists just get government money but don't really do anything of importance?

When science becomes politicized its no longer science.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

We just don't pretend science is something everyone can just vote on. Science is fact,not consensus.

Not based on what I've read. If you're unpopular or unknown and have an answer that contradicts the consensus view, good luck getting published.

Wouldn't that suggest that "consensus" can often hide the truth?

And that we shouldn't make life-altering, $100 Trillion Dollar, inalienable rights destroying decisions (like the one scientist who suggested suspending democracy to save us all) based on "consensus" and the need to immediately act on the sketchy, unproved, speculative-at-best alleged negative consequences such "consensus" allegedly suggests?

NOBODY can accuse me of being anything BUT a science guy. My issue is not whether there is a problem. It's the bullshit about the world ending in 12 years, when reality suggests a small loss of livable coastline and some agriculture strain from drought. We certainly shouldn't immediately chop off our own dicks to save our lives from a "life threatening disease", only to find out the worst-case scenario was some tender tenders and a cure as simple as some lotion and a nudie mag.

But, they almost pulled off the dick-chop con job (Cap and Trade).

.

Yes, they can and I believe they often do hide the truth. But more often it isn't on purpose, they just follow along with what everyone else is saying. They need funding for their projects too and no one wants to swim against the current.

Who has $100 trillion?? Maybe these fine people?

Google summit on climate change attended by stars in private jets, mega yachts slammed as 'hypocritical'

If we're going to spend $100 trillion, or even $1 trillion, we should probably be absolutely sure of the causes behind climate change. I'm guessing we shouldn't make any mistakes As it is, science isn't sure why the bees are dying. There are numerous possible causes. Plus, there's the problem of the 26 genders. DNA says there are only 2 genders. Are geneticists wrong? OMG how can we trust scientists about climate change when they're so very wrong about something as simple as gender?!

26 genders is so old fashioned. According to liberal science there are 81 genders.

63 Genders ― A New Perspective on Sex and Gender

 

[lennypartiv]

These scientists are crossing the line when they tell businessmen how to run their businesses.

 

[MoonPie]

Minimum wage should be increased to $15/hr

The arguments we hear about it now are the same arguments when Truman doubled the minimum wage.

We'd end up with more taxpayers, more taxes being paid, fewer people on the welfare rolls, fewer people receiving food stamps, etc.

This could have been resolved by Trump agreeing to raise minimum wage in exchange for support for the border wall.

CBO disagrees with some of that. There will be less, not more taxpayers, because there would be net job loss expectancy.

To me minimum wage is a very simple issue that comes down to the basic question of what we think is the most minimal accpetable compensation for labor.

I place it at around $10 hour nationaly, the fact at that level there would be almost no job loss expected is just a cherry on top.

And those people will remain unemployed forever? How long will that net job loss last?

Nationally I'd go for $12 but we know the minimum probably won't get raised again for decades so I'm sticking with $15.

 

[sealybobo]

We don't need people telling us what kind of car we can and cannot drive.

Yes you do. Do your car look anything like the steel boat your parents drove when you were a kid? Nope. They are now made of plastic, lighter, cheaper, safer, airbags. You MUST wear a seatbelt, cadalitic converter must be on, no lead gas, etc....

Otherwise, you would see non car manufacturing cars on the road. Like I can't make a car and drive it on the public roads. It has to be safe.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Minimum wage should be increased to $15/hr

The arguments we hear about it now are the same arguments when Truman doubled the minimum wage.

We'd end up with more taxpayers, more taxes being paid, fewer people on the welfare rolls, fewer people receiving food stamps, etc.

This could have been resolved by Trump agreeing to raise minimum wage in exchange for support for the border wall.

We'd end up with more taxpayers, more taxes being paid, fewer people on the welfare rolls, fewer people receiving food stamps, etc.

Sounds like magic!!!


What's the downside?

 

[Sunsettommy]

Joe Bastardi who is a Republican (Meteorology degree) asked Greta a few questions that warmist loons HERE would fail to answer because the facts Joe brings up are too hard to swallow. This is how warmists level of ignorance and stupidity grows and most warmists are DEMOCRATS!

From CFACT:

Questions for Greta

Selected excerpt:

First of all, is not Greta’s chosen method of transportation an INDICTMENT of the idea we can even think about getting off fossil fuels? Who has the resources and backing to get a fancy yacht and cross the Atlantic? And how is taking the way we cross oceans back to the time of Columbus anything but counter to progress? So only under very special circumstances, extraordinary resources, and several weeks where you can do nothing, is this even possible.

As to the Current climate emergency: I would like to know what Greta opposes in the following items

Climate-related deaths

Is this not a major positive?

LINK for the rest
===========================================================

People like Greta runs on emotions (she cried over a lie about a starving polar bear) who parrots the message that few people outside of loony leftist circles take seriously as they know those people are delusional morons. The adult loons have failed, now they are using kids like Greta, in another attempt to push their dumb as hell "we are doomed" if we don't destroy Capitalism and push Authoritarian Socialism in its place as the cure all for combatting climate change narrative, something that is destined to fail.

We have to deal with a lot of emotional, we are doomed bullcrap on a daily basis over events that have always happened before but now greatly magnified by the foolish Media who lies and misrepresent the events and the science in general.

The heatwaves mania in recent months, mostly found at large URBAN with high UHI effects large population cities. While they minimize or even ignore the growing snow and cold records trend in recent years.

The wildfire mania, when there are actually fewer acres burned than 50-100 years ago.

The Sea level change mania, that doesn't imperil anyone at all. Humans have dealt with far more rapid sea level changes than now, such as the DOGGERLAND region, where people still easily just moved to higher ground.

"But those humans were forced inland to higher ground due to rising water levels which began about 8,000 years ago and flooded what is now the North Sea. "

The drought or deluge manias, where any events are wailed over as portents of doom, the sickness of leftism ecoloony activism never ceases to amaze me.

I left that political party in the early 1990's when I realized that leftism had pushed out the moderate and conservative democrats from the power in the party. Now there few decent democrats left in congress, as the rest of the party these days are getting exposed as America hating galouts.

 

[SSDD]

What kind of scientists are you talking about? The kind who keep an open mind to ALL possibilities or the kind who take government grants from liberals, then give them the results they want for political gain?

So just because the results come out in favor of what the study is for, it HAS to be false. You realize the fallacy in that right?

What results would those be? Over the past 3 decades, about a trillion dollars has been spent on climate "science" and to date

1. There is not a single piece of observed, measured evidence which supports the man made climate change hypothesis over natural variability...

2. There is not a single piece of observed, measured evidence which establishes a coherent relationship between the absorption of infrared radiation by a gas and warming in the atmosphere.

3. There has not been a single paper published in which the hypothetical warming due to the greenhouse gasses we produce has been empirically measured, quantified, and blamed on those greenhouse gasses.

Now, for a trillion dollars, isn't it reasonable to expect at least a single piece of evidence or a single paper that would satisfy any of the 3 statements above?

Which evidence are you talking about? Lets see some of it....lets see any that would satisfy any one of the 3 statements above?

 

[SSDD]

From their comments, it's questionable. They think scientists just get government money but don't really do anything of importance?

We are done with your settled scientists and your settled science.....

I'm curious. What is "settled" science? Do you have any examples?

Only climate science claims to be settled...hell, actual scientists can't even come to an agreement on what causes gravity...in real science, the questions never end...in pseudoscience, shut the f*ck up so long as the funding continues...

 

[SSDD]

My new truck has a 48 gallon...wait for it...diesel tank and a giant V8 diesel motor, just doing my part to reduce global warming.

That will do till you can find one that runs on coal...