Is the left anti-science?

is the left anti-science?

Other urls found in this thread:

foxnews.com/science/2017/02/07/federal-scientist-cooked-climate-change-books-ahead-obama-presentation-whistle-blower-charges.html
youtube.com/watch?v=1M-2_OD3oMc
youtu
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Yes.

The current left is definitely anti-logic. This implies that they are anti-science, as science is based on logical deduction.

WRONG

Science is based on empirical observation

If you're going to pretend to be pro-science you should probably stop using these words you don't understand like they're magical talismans

Modern science is dead because the left infected it with their old age faggotry.

Shouldn't it not be based on external genitalia and instead be based on chromosomes?

>science is based on logical deduction

where do you live

I'll fight you in real life

the left loves to science the shit out of this

Yes.

They are the enemies of anything rational.

I don't fucking know man. Used to be if you treated everyone by merit, based your life (as best one could) on impractical evidence, and let people do & day as they please; then it was assumed you were left leaning. Now with the new secular civic-nationalist right that we have under Trump I guess these qualities are only found in the right.

Yeah they deny the reality of race, and that evolution applies to humans too. The left wing have their own brand of creationists who dominate the university system.

empirical evidence*
Dumb newfangled phones.

Well the right sure as shit is.

>have theory about why something happens
>develop experiment to demonstrate if your theory is correct
>logically conclude that your theory, not other stimuli, explain the difference between control and experimental group

Logic begat the scientific method. If you don't understand this, you don't understand science. It's the entire reason why we seek to disprove, not seek to prove.

The right denies climate change because it's inconvenient for their corporate overlords. The left is scared of anything with a sciency sounding acronym because they are idiots.

Nope.

>The right denies climate change because it's inconvenient for their corporate overlords.
WRONG

>Used to be if you treated everyone by merit, based your life (as best one could) on empirical evidence, and let people do & day as they please
That has always, always been the right.

The left is big government to help the needy, it's always been definite by acting on emotions. The left has never been "let people do as they please". There was a time where both sides believe in merit based society but that's changed on the left for the last few decades.

Both sides are anti-science in their own ways.

Righties deny climate change, lefties deny race and sex differences, and sometimes nuclear power.

No, the right denies the assumption that human impact on the environmental climate change is significant. They also asserted that the data was being falsified to push forward agendas other than environmentalism.

>foxnews.com/science/2017/02/07/federal-scientist-cooked-climate-change-books-ahead-obama-presentation-whistle-blower-charges.html

huh... imagine that.. could they have been right?

The right denies climate change because it is utter bullshit.

yes.

they believe that all humans are created equal for some reason.

Every denies science they don't like. The left denies science over trannies, niggers, all non-whites, crime, etc.

>we deny climate change
It doesn't help that scientists are now proven to have been exaggerating the effects.

Let's see what far right offers:
>creationism
>intelligent design
>flat earth
>vaccines cause autism

I don't understand how this has gotten so inflated. The right (read: actual conservative people not the retards who are just anti-left on everything) never doubted the climate changes. Everything changes, the argument was over HUMAN IMPACT. Was the world warming up because of humans? Or was the world warming up because it warms up? All the data said that the world goes up and down in global temperature, but suddenly 3 decades ago we start hearing about global warming and how its all our fault. Now we find out that the data HAS been fudged, and it all comes together.

Well the right here in the US for a long fucking time were fundy Christians. So the Left did have to fight for a long time to get biology and cosmological physics taught in schools.

Left have lots of science-cheerers, people who live pop-sci youtube channels and think they are very intellegent because they know random trivia about stuff

left no, liberals yes. idpol is bourgeois roleplaying

>buying the empirical observation meme
>ignoring all the baggage that comes with empiricism

guy who regrets taking college anthropology here, the left isnt so much anti science but doesnt know how to restrain themselves with new information. for example if a tribe of indigenous people believe there is a third gender then that is enough information to say that there is a third gender. or they base it on the occasions that a deformitie occur in a persons genitalia or chromosomes. they treat these few cases as a large group of people which is their biggest problem. overexaggerating the existance of something small

>fundy Christians
>t. high school junior

lol no. The Republicans got the fundamentalist Christians in the late 50's because of the fear of Communism. Same time we added "in god we trust" to the money. The right was not alligned with any religions whatsoever, except perhaps jews but that was both sides so its hard to shake them.

Literally all christnigger/controlled opposition opinions. Not endorsed by the mainstream right and not held by anyone on this board.

Leftist denial of science, particularly gender being a choice and no significant genetic differences between human populations that have historically been isolated from one another, is fundamental to their belief system and held by nearly every single player in their camp.

(((Climate change))) is a tool of globalist juden overlords, which is far worse.

Everyone is anti-science if their biases conflict with the evidence. Unless a huge government bullshit machine is in place which purposefully fucks up who gets funding, which happens with genetics of race, global warming, and child sexual relationships.

>the epic unibformed moderate liberal that is never wrong

Fuck off nigger, it was literally just reported by one John J Bates that the climate change science was pushed through with unverified data.

>logical deduction
Please explain how logical deduction is possible without empirical oberservation?

He didn't say that you mong

This. Ask most Christians about vaccines, creationism, intelligent design, and flat earth, and they will tell you the same thing every normal person does. The regular, joe-shlomo lefties all spout their denial of science, it's in their platform, not just their outliers.

Classical liberalism still exists, but those people identify as "independent" and probably voted for Trump this past election to be quite desu senfam.

nah. "The right" believe what they are told just like "the left" do.
Political parties lobbied by oil companies do push pro-oil propaganda.

Forget left and right, we must KNOW ourselves, as individuals, to the best possible standards.

Ubermensch must fight for the redpill of absolute truth.

they are anti logic, just like any other fananatic

I think it more stems from the mantra of "everyone is equal" so when you get those genetic deformities the left has to treat them as their own group rather than a failure or something going wrong.

>ignoring the facts
>talking about redpills and absolute truth

okee dokee chew soap

Aren't you guys tired of speaking in hyperboles and cynicism?
>oh yes the left is anti-science because gender identities
>and differences between races
>and climate change is a hoax invented by jews
>all the things I don't like are from jews, niggers, liberals and jewish liberal niggers

>muh not take a concrete stance
>muh hide in meaningless, esoteric dribble so I always have an out

Let's see what the left offers
>omg nuclear bad, muh three mile island, china syndrome
>omg climate change, muh al gore, polar bears
>omg pit bulls killl 12 people a year in a country with 350 million people
>lawdy muh gun violence, oh shit let's pretend it isn't all in gun free ghettos

It's not cynicism if it's true

also anthropologist here, stay modernist. Don't fall for their post-modernist bullshit. There is a resurgence in the field because many people stayed quiet for too long and are fed up of the political bullshit that comes with post-modernism. It's okay to say that cultures are different, and it's okay to say that some are more advanced than others. It's even okay to say that parts of a culture are completely unacceptable by modern standards and we need to help those people modernize.

Not all of the left
youtube.com/watch?v=1M-2_OD3oMc

Just because a few liberals deny it doesn't mean everyone denies that race and intelligence correlates.

>Ubermensch must fight for the redpill of absolute truth.

Do you even understand what you're referring to or how you're misusing phrases?

Late 50's to mid 2000's. Sounds like a long time to be run by religion. Long enough to earn it's reputation.

Like it or not, the right is more grounded in science than the left. Obviously both sides have their biases, and there are certain people who claim to be from "the right" who ignore science in some very big areas.

The difference, however, is those people are a MINORITY of the right. The science deniers of the left are PART OF THEIR FUCKING PLATFORM. They have people marching in the streets specifically because of their refusal to accept evidence and statistics. When you ask people who voted for trump, no one is going to say because of his stance on creationism (hint: he didn't fucking have one). When you ask people who voted for Hillary, they're going to say muh diversity, muh genderz, muh pronouns, muh wimminz rights.

That's why the left is "anti-science" here. Are there probably traditional liberals left? sure. But they better wake the fuck up and either fix their party or start a new one before the pink haired panqueer transbians take away their political power for the next 2 decades.

>Just because a few liberals deny it doesn't mean everyone denies that race and intelligence correlates.
You're right, it doesn't. As a matter of fact, however, most liberals do.

Do you have any sources to back up your claims? Please be aware that alternative facts don't actually count.

>late 50's to mid 2000's is a long time
>country is 200 years old
>religious zealots are huge minority of Republican party and politics in general

my comment of "t. high school junior" still stands. You have absolutely no grasp for how this political change happened. Convincing the "religious right" to vote republican was all in an effort to secure more votes and power during a time when it was easy to convince people that liberal = communist. It was an insurance policy and numbers. And they did it by allowing the religious right two issues: gay marriage and abortion. That's it. The religious stay the fuck out of everything else for all serious consideration, and the Republicans go with their stance on those issues.

And for the record, I was formerly having no problems with abortion or gay marriage, but the way the left acted in regards to those issues and others makes me go against them as a knee-jerk reaction. The left is so frequently wrong about so many things that I can't help but assume they are also wrong about gay marriage and abortion. Better to be safe than sorry, in my book.

>Righties deny climate change
No one denies that there are seasons and "ice ages", beyond that we are getting a lot of conflicting information and what exactly is the result of man and how serious its impact on the environment is.

But even then that's no the real issue. The thing the right wing has a problem with is carbon taxes when the doesn't actually solve anything, it just hikes the prices up and kills small business. If petrol and coal are really that dangerous to us in the long term then they would be being banned out right and the west would be making plans to invade china and stop them too.

All I ask is for same plain data, not needlessly abstused, and an actual sound plan to fix/curb any damage that doesn't just punish the lower and middle class

To clarify my post, what you're talking about is a vocal minority just like vocal republican minorities support creationism and deny climate change.

What do you think Affirmative Action is based on?

>inb4 minorities with difficult past need help
Then why are Asians the most hurt by it?

The reasoning is and always has been:
>races are equal
>therefore, assuming no inequalities exist, outcome should be equal
>outcome is not equal
>therefore inequalities exist
>we have to make up these inequalities by our own inequalities

Please, explain how this staple of the liberal agenda is not based in the assumption of race not being a determinant of intelligence.

>alternative facts meme
>so spicy, need milk

sources to back up what claim? that denying the science of two genders and denying the science behind the transgender movement is part of the left's basic platform? Do you not have eyes or ears or the ability to retain information from this past election? Oh here, I have some good for you.

>youtu be/z8Lg3BQaGIE?t=1m8s

He virtue signals right there in his speech. He can't help it, its just like every other democrat right now.

its sad how true that is

a lot of modern theoretical physics are not empirical at all

Neither side actually cares about science--they really only care for findings that support their positions or agendas. Everything else is ignored as necessary. Since the Left holds a strong view on climate change, evolution and other scientific consensuses disliked by the Right, it appears to be more pro-science, but it's really not.

What peeves me is how concerned both sides are with "ethics" and other nonsense. If we spent more money on "dangerous" energy sources or stopped pointlessly fussing over genetic modification of food or even humans, intentional specicide, or radically altering the environment, there'd be nothing to fight over in the first place.

Does it hurt to be so full of yourself and talk down to people so much? Nothing you have said do I really disagree with nor does it disprove my point. The right for a fucking long time (which 50 years is) has been fundy Christians. So in the context of this thread and what I have said. All you have done is go hurr durr your in Jr high and history was different once therefore u dumb. Like a bloody spastic. So yeah not too long ago classic liberalism was thought off as the left and pro science. Also it's fine being under age v& but stop acting like. I get your in high school and read a few books so you're used to picking on Jr high kids but when pretending to be an adult on Sup Forums use the pejorative college liberal degree. It still won't be clever but at least you'll sound older.

>this abhorrent command of English
>writing so much text to say you aren't underage

Yeah, that's what I thought.

>left is anti science and that's bad
>muh bible is right despite what science says
pick one niggers

>empirical observation

So are quantum mechanics observable? WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW

>t. high school junior

that's all I read from that.

Also I didn't even read this fully, you're saying I'm making fun of a junior high school child, that's basically confirming you're even younger than I thought.

where did this "climate change has been exaggerated" thing come from? sauce?

>foxnews.com/science/2017/02/07/federal-scientist-cooked-climate-change-books-ahead-obama-presentation-whistle-blower-charges.html

It's been reported a few other places, but that's the first one I found. Basically an insider came out and said that they didn't get paid unless they got the numbers they were "supposed to get" so they just took down the thermometers in most places and wrote whatever got them funding for their other research.

yes.

>fox news
well ok

>it's been reported a few other places, but that's the first one I found
>lol fox news

Seriously do some fucking research, I'm not your fucking dad.

no one denies that the climate changes we all know that over time the climate does in fact change. what we don't believe is that humans contribute to global climate changes in a significant manner.

the left likes to change the meaning behind words they say 97% of scientist believe climate change is real while implying that it means those scientist believe humans cause it. but all those scientist are only agreeing that the climate does change over time.