Democrats are quick to attack the right for having skepticism or alternative views on vaccines, masks, global warming, and other aspects of science.
They claim they follow “science,” unlike us. But the Left is full of questionable views on science.
Their insistence on radical positions in regards to global warming, without any room for opposing views or moderation, is the most obvious one.
They’ve been making dire warnings for years, predicting when the Earth will destruct, yet are never correct.
In 2006, Al Gore warned that the world had until January 27, 2016, to end its dependency on fossil fuels or there would be a global emergency. In 2019, Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez predicted the world would end in 12 years if climate change wasn’t addressed.
Yet the MSM gives them a free pass and they continue to hold significant influence in public life.
No matter how much evidence emerges showing that the Earth goes through natural cooling and warming phases, likely caused by sunspots so not all of the warming can be due to man; the Left refuses to acknowledge even the possibility of these factors, ignoring them.
It’s almost a cult-like obsession. Now they have too much money invested in it to ever admit they were wrong; it’s become a big business on the Left, giving government grants and tax breaks to their favorite Lefty corporations involved in “going green.”
The Left is always promoting dubious health schemes that are either lacking in significant positive studies or have serious problems, such as organic foods and eating vegetarian.
Any negatives — such as people dying from them — are just glossed over as if they don’t exist. The Left goes into hysterics against GMOs but refuses to acknowledge that more than 900 studies from every major health organization in the world, including the World Health Organization, have declared that GMOs are safe to eat.
Contrast this to the Left’s attitude about vaccines. Similar to the other issues just mentioned, there are some concerns. Hundreds of people died after taking the COVID-19 vaccine.
Yet the Left will not allow any room for skepticism, they demand that every healthy person take it, without acknowledging that it may not be a good idea for some people based on — wait for it — science.
This attitude is actually stopping people from getting the vaccine. Some are so disturbed by the Left’s unwillingness to present the entire picture regarding the vaccine that they figure it must be pretty dangerous.
While it is true that many holistic types of approaches can work for some people, they don’t always and someone who could have been healed through a conventional treatment like chemotherapy or radiation may have died unnecessarily.
But you’ll never hear the Left admit this; as usual, when it comes to junk science, they only allow one perspective to come out. Any position that isn’t theirs is labeled junk science or a conspiracy theory.
The Left’s reaction toward nuclear power is a classic example of ignoring science. The nuclear leak that took place at Chernobyl was the result of carelessness, not because nuclear power correctly handled is bad for the environment.
Precautions have been taken since then to ensure that it never happens again. But 35 years after Chernobyl, the Left triumphantly shut down the Indian Point nuclear plant near New York City.
Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo labeled it a “ticking time bomb” that he had been trying to shut down for 15 years. But nuclear power is one of the cleanest, safest, most environmentally friendly forms of energy available.
It is the safest energy source and about the cheapest.
Solar, wind, and hydro kill more people. France has wised up, with over 70 percent of its electricity coming from nuclear power.
Then there’s astrology. Far more Democrats than Republicans believe in astrology, but do you ever hear them ridiculed the way the Right is ridiculed for believing the Bible?
The Left frequently refers to the Bible as “fairy tales,” but have you ever heard astrology called fairy tales? Of course not.
The MSM pretends the obsession doesn’t even exist, and Leftists constantly reference their signs as if it’s no big deal, in fact, it’s considered cool. But bring up a verse in the Bible and you’re likely to hear a derogatory remark like “Santa Claus in the sky.”
Steven Milloy, who runs junkscience.com, explains why the Left is so attracted to junk science. The Left-wing media deliberately hypes up junk science in order to produce sensational headlines that attract readers.
Personal injury lawyers pile on in order to make money from huge lawsuits. The National Trial Lawyers Association is almost entirely composed of Democrats; in 2014, 97 percent of members’ donations went to Democrats.
Government regulators can expand their power and push through their liberal agendas. A study from the 2016 presidential election found that 95 percent of contributions to the race from federal government workers at 14 agencies went to Hillary Clinton, with only 5 percent going to Donald Trump.
Additionally, studies show Democrats are more ruled by their emotions than Republicans. This is why they are more susceptible to believe that a photo of a polar bear on a shrinking glacier is a sign of impending worldwide destruction.
Republicans, on the other hand, will research the reason why the polar bear is there in order to get to the bottom of the situation before reacting.
The Foundation for Economic Education investigated a video of a polar bear with ribs showing as it was looking for food. National Geographic headlined it, “This is what climate change looks like.” It’s the most viewed video on the magazine’s website.
In reality, the polar bear population has been increasing. One of the photographers later admitted that the bear’s sorry appearance could have been due to other reasons.
The practice of claiming they follow science while labeling conservative thought junk science is just more of the Left’s modus operandi, claiming the right is guilty of what they’re really guilty of.
Don’t let them get away with it, label it junk science.
Read more at Townhall
“Science” (Latin, “Having knowledge”) is indeed used as a term equivalent to some supposed absolute certainty. It has become an absolutist concept, virtually a quasi religious dogma not to be questioned. In addition it is closely linked to political aims, whatever suits the agenda. But as Einstein pointed out, “consensus” in science goes against the fact that it is so often the individual who so often as h1story shows is the pioneer and proves correct. Science in its proper form is debate and exchange, until a solution seems to fit and explain within the abilities of a situation – hence “science” changes all the time. It is also related to sociological, religious, cultural modes and fashions of any given time. Since it is born of human observation and ideas and deductions, it can never be somehow apart from our own human limitations. We do not even know what an atom is, r why here is a universe, or anything at all. “Knowing” is not solely within that framework. There are other ways of knowing which are not necessarily rational, least of all worked out on computer modelling., as any artist, poet, composer, visionary, even ordinary person, knows. So just to dismiss for instance, astrology as nonsense, “fairy tale” misses the point, as Jung in his work and researches into the human psyche knew, and as did his friend and patient Physicist and Nobel winner Wolfgang Pauli. As Jung sought to show along with Pauli, it is part of a totality and unity of time and space, the old formula “as above so below”, a unity of all, as quantum shows. Astrology is one way of knowing far beyond newspaper daily forecasts. The mantra “Listen to the Science” is meaningless if just one “science” accepted by a majority is what is meant. The current approach by the politicians and the vast forces financing them in pursuit of supposedly “green” ideas is a misuse of any real science. It has a sinister side: “”sinister” in Latin means the left, unlucky, inauspicious, of evil intent, unfortunate. As opposed to right: the right hand, correct. The Extreme “Right” in the political world and extreme Left always become a form of Fascism. We can see in the whole AGW/climate hysteria the way Left leaning government rushes into State control. One leans of gaining that State Control is fear, frighten us, doom and misery is coming, a world on fire with global warming, so we (meaning Government) must “tackle it”. The first thing to do is to use ways of silencing any views which go against that. So what is “The Science”? Where is choice (in Greek “Hairesis”, heresy). No “choice is allowed it is heresy. The heretic chooses. Hence the use now of the term “climate denier” , as with the Church in former times, a “denier” was a “heretic”. Nothing changes much.
An argument that needs to be authenticated by the claim that it is THE SCIENCE is not science.
https://wp.me/pTN8Y-74p
Spending a fortune on Anthropogenic Climate Change is like betting your house on getting five heads in a row from a coin toss gamble. And that’s with a coin that probably has tails both sides.
The climate must be being altered to a significant degree, carbon dioxide must be the cause, that carbon dioxide must be emitted by man and not nature, the solutions we have such as solar panels and wind turbines must work and it all must be affordable.
So far the answers are: it isn’t really, that isn’t at all the case, it is only partially so, they don’t and we can’t. That’s pretty close to five tails and we only really need one to make the whole thing a waste of time and money.
Gambling ads in Australia must legally tell you to walk away from your losses. But with Anthropogenic Climate Change we just chase them, throwing more and more money into a dud bet.
The Democ-Rat Science Junk Science the Democ-Rats just oppose all the truth about it all since most of them including Biden and total Globalists
Science is a method – it’s not a subject (like say Chemistry or Thermodynamics) – so mantras like “believe the science”, “we are following the science” “the science is settled” etc. etc. are both vague and hollow.
When a politician says something like “we are acting on the science” (which is particularly prevalent on the subject of climate change and has been similarly applied to the Covid-19 crisis), you would do well to remember this is clearly obfuscation and what it really means is :-
1) I don’t understand the subject !
2) I therefore cannot explain it to an audience.
3) The subject is complicated and confused
4) There are conflicting opinions between experts.
5) I have chosen only those opinions or experts that suit my paradigm or expedient needs.
6) I will claim success for good outcomes and blame the scientists for bad outcomes.
So when you see / read / hear a politician or the press using these mantras remember you are being spoken to as an adult might speak to a child – you are being fobbed off by an ignoramus masquerading as knowledgeable – it’s clearly insulting.