"The Republicans’ war on science and reason"

A liberal Dem slammed NASA, the one true agency that can give us a return on our investment and true economic stimulis. So to hell with this leftist garbage that the Republicans are anti-science. That is left-wing scare tactics and propaganda.
 
Last edited:
Bill Thompson said:
A liberal Dem slammed NASA, the one true agency that can give us a return on our investment and true economic stimulis. So to hell with this leftist garbage that the Republicans are anti-science. That is left-wing scare tactics and propaganda.
Click to expand...
How many fallacies can one person include in one post? What's the record Bill, are you trying to break it?
 
Bill Thompson said:
...NASA, the one true agency that can give us a return on our investment and true economic stimulis.
Click to expand...

Quite aside from the cherrypicking, I think that Bill Thompson needs to provide evidence for this claim that NASA is the "one true" way here.

I support NASA, but that's not the only worthy cause. What happened to energy research?

Society runs on energy, like it or not. There is never, EVER an example where less energy was more energy. Sorry, that's the history of it. Nearly all of technology is an example of how to convert energy into something useful to mankind.
 
DavidJames said:
How many fallacies can one person include in one post? What's the record Bill, are you trying to break it?
Click to expand...

I lost count at "straw man, one true scotsman, cherrypicking data, suborned inference, excluded middle and ad-hominem". I think I missed a few, but it is a candidate for 'most deceitful post of the month club'.
 
Rashmi said:
I truly believe the Republican party has figured out what PT Barnum knew so well, half of USA are idiots, and they can exploit that. Same reason they are anti education, want to regulate the internet, criticize universities and highly educated people, it's all just a way to pander to the moron vote, and keep a good supply of morons.

I'm sure the ones at the top are well aware of what is happening, as are some of the right wing pundits, they haven't cared about anything but lower taxes for the rich since Reagan, yet half the people keep believing they care about what's good for America.

If Rush Limbaugh had said he believed in Global Warming, I believe the Republican party would have had to accept his opinion, but he didn't so they have to go with what the fat rich man says. By denying what is obvious to 98% of scientists, they can keep their ignorant base in line and praying for a job.
Click to expand...
I think you have it right. But I can't help thinking some of those guys in on the scam like Rove are thinking about now that they should have been more careful what they wished for. :)
 
Bill Thompson said:
A liberal Dem slammed NASA, the one true agency that can give us a return on our investment and true economic stimulis. So to hell with this leftist garbage that the Republicans are anti-science. That is left-wing scare tactics and propaganda.
Click to expand...

A single Democrat or single Republican attacking science doesn't amount to much, one way or another. Most of those contending for the Republican nomination for President of the United States are antagonistic to environmental legislation - including laws limiting air pollution, are climate change deniers and have stated that they do not accept evolution. That amounts to a great deal.

However, we certainly should look into the case you mentioned. So, please let us know the following specifics:

1) Who is this liberal Democrat?

2) What exactly does he or she have against NASA, and in what context did the liberal Democrat make the remarks slamming NASA?

3) What is your source (link if you have it)?
 
TimCallahan said:
A single Democrat or single Republican attacking science doesn't amount to much, one way or another. Most of those contending for the Republican nomination for President of the United States are antagonistic to environmental legislation - including laws limiting air pollution, are climate change deniers and have stated that they do not accept evolution. That amounts to a great deal.
Click to expand...
yup, and just to expand a bit
Climate deniers, which includes all the legitimate Republican contenders, routinely say that NASA is guilty of incompetence/fraud. Comparing the things prominent Republican candidates and pundits regularly say about NASA to what a single un-named Dem may or may not have said is ridiculous IMO.
 
lomiller said:
yup, and just to expand a bit
Climate deniers, which includes all the legitimate Republican contenders, routinely say that NASA is guilty of incompetence/fraud. Comparing the things prominent Republican candidates and pundits regularly say about NASA to what a single un-named Dem may or may not have said is ridiculous IMO.
Click to expand...

Here's Michele Bachmann's view of NASA's "war on heaven."

At this site you can see the views of Gingrich, Pawlenty and Romney to the effect that space exploration should be left to the private sector.
 
Last edited:
Bill Thompson said:
A liberal Dem slammed NASA, the one true agency that can give us a return on our investment and true economic stimulis. So to hell with this leftist garbage that the Republicans are anti-science. That is left-wing scare tactics and propaganda.
Click to expand...

I have given you specific names of those among the contenders for the Republican nomination, what they believe and the links to my sources. These are specific, concrete facts. Why don't you reciprocate? So, again:

Who is this liberal Democrat?

How, exactly, did he or she slam NASA?

What is your source?
 
Last edited:
This question will sound condescending, but do Americans in general realise that this religion vs science is fairly specific to them and their versions of the Christian religion (I'm thinking evangelicals, the born again types, those who believe in the rapture, etc.)?

I mean that, as has been pointed out many times on this board, the Vatican accepts evolution (somehow) as does the Church of England, and no-one I know who actually describes themselves as religious and goes to church (occasionally) would give ID or creationism house room.
 
Humes fork said:
From The Washington Post:



I'm very happy to live in a part of the world in the US Republican Party would be unelectable, though admittedly that unelectability wouldn't come from (at least not mainly) their anti-science.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, how are the Republicans "anti-science." Why would anyone think that? Perhaps because some reject the fable of Man made global warming? What?
 
Robert Prey said:
Just out of curiosity, how are the Republicans "anti-science." Why would anyone think that? Perhaps because some reject the fable of Man made global warming? What?
Click to expand...

some Republicans (especially in the bible belt states) want to implement or require Schools to teach Intelligent Design as the same as Evolution. Some of them want to have Intelligent Design to replace Evolution altogether. That is wholly anti-science.

Many of them who are pro-life want to also define personhood at the moment of conception. Science and law does not agree.
 
Robert Prey said:
Just out of curiosity, how are the Republicans "anti-science." Why would anyone think that? Perhaps because some reject the fable of Man made global warming? What?
Click to expand...

Heheh!

Wait...you're not joking, are you?

Not that evidence would convince you, but PolitiFact disagrees with you (and so do the overwhelming majority of climate scientists).

-Bri
 
Robert Prey said:
Just out of curiosity, how are the Republicans "anti-science." Why would anyone think that? Perhaps because some reject the fable of Man made global warming? What?
Click to expand...

Okay, I'll walk you through this in steps. Point #1: The climate of the earth is, over all, getting warmer. Do you dispute this, or are we in agreement on it?
 
Robert Prey said:
Just out of curiosity, how are the Republicans "anti-science." Why would anyone think that? Perhaps because some reject the fable of Man made global warming? What?
Click to expand...
Bob- you're such a great kidder! And you do it with such a straight face that you really had me going for a while, until you gave it away with the global warming "fable" bit! Ha ha ha. Oh- wait- I got one for you that I heard from Bachmann: "evolution is just a theory... a belief... not a fact." Good joke, huh?
 
TimCallahan said:
Okay, I'll walk you through this in steps. Point #1: The climate of the earth is, over all, getting warmer. Do you dispute this, or are we in agreement on it?
Click to expand...

Absolutely. In very small increments. Ever since the last Ice Age. That's not in dispute by anybody.
 
Arus808 said:
some Republicans (especially in the bible belt states) want to implement or require Schools to teach Intelligent Design as the same as Evolution. Some of them want to have Intelligent Design to replace Evolution altogether. That is wholly anti-science.

Many of them who are pro-life want to also define personhood at the moment of conception. Science and law does not agree.
Click to expand...

I've heard that even some Democrats are pro life. Actually, a whole lot of them.What does that have to do with being anti-science?
 
Bill Thompson said:
A liberal Dem slammed NASA, the one true agency that can give us a return on our investment and true economic stimulis. So to hell with this leftist garbage that the Republicans are anti-science. That is left-wing scare tactics and propaganda.
Click to expand...

Don't ya think that TANG and GPS would have been invented privately, without spending a trillion or so on outer space games?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom