Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
drvoke

Can Republicans solve their science denial problem?

Recommended Posts

The "smart idiot" effect. LOL. That's a new one. It makes sense, but who's kidding who? Most cons are just morons.
(Full article at above link)
This rising distrust of science is particularly high among higher-educated conservatives, in what’s been coined the “smart idiot” effect. Essentially, on complicated scientific subjects like climate change, more highly-educated ideologically-biased individuals possess more tools to fool themselves into denying the science and rejecting the conclusions of experts.

Chris Mooney has attributed these trends to the growth of the ‘religious right’ and other changes in the Republican Party:

Clearly, The Republican War on Science’s politicization thesis is being strongly validated—a thesis that attributes the problem to the growth of a modern conservative movement, its need to appease its core interest groups and constituencies (corporate America, conservative Christians), its need to have its own alternative expertise and journalism (think tanks, Fox, Limbaugh), and so on … as the “New Right” emerged in the U.S. in the wake of the cultural battles of the 1960s and 1970s, it mobilized strong forces of authoritarianism–e.g., psychological rigidity and closed-mindedness.

 

Indeed, authoritarians favor Donald Trump, whose supporters have considerable overlap with climate science denial. Robert Brulle’s research into the ‘dark money’ funding climate denial also helps explain the problem. The Republican Party has become increasingly dependent upon corporate funding and support, which is heavily skewed in the direction of climate denial. The near-total abandonment of party leadership on the climate issue has sent a signal to Republican voters – climate change isn’t a concern, and anyone saying otherwise is part of the hoax.

The growth of this anti-science strain of the Republican Party thus seems to stem from multiple sources: increased party reliance on the religious right and corporate interests, and the growth of a right-wing media echo chamber that feeds anti-scienceconspiratorial thinking.

However, there is good news. For one, climate denial is largely limited to a small and dwindling group of old, white, male conservatives; hence, it’s not a tenable long-term position for the Republican Party. Like opposition to gay marriage, science denial is a position that will increasingly alienate young voters in particular, who will bear the brunt of the consequences of climate inaction.

The party’s chosen path has also resulted in the Donald Trump candidacy, which has GOP leadership in a panic. For these reasons, a rebound away from extreme partisanship and towards reality may be imminent. Already a group of House Republicans signed the Gibson climate change Resolution and formed the bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus, acknowledging the reality of human-caused climate change and the need to do something about it.

Perhaps this blossoming Republican climate leadership will trickle down to reverse the ideologically-based science denial among too many party members.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most conservatives live in another universe with inconsistent physical laws. They just make stuff up on Fox, and the talking heads and the people have forgotten how to distinguish reality from fantasy. I think conservatives just watch too much TV.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Science like if you have a penis you're a man not a woman? That kind of science?

No you fool, that's called a social issue.

But thanks for proving you're not only science challenged but ignorant to the max about science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The word science is taken from the Latin scientia which means knowledge. Conservatives consider something to be true when it is proved to be true and can be shown to be true in every case. Liberals have an alternate view of the truth, they believe things are true because one of their friends or Oprah or Bill Mahr said it is true. Global warming may be occurring now, but the planet has been much hotter in the past. The question is what is causing it to get warmer now. This is a cause and effect question and beyond the brainpower of a liberal to understand it. When the scientists PROVE that global warming is caused by human beings, and there is no doubt about it, then the conservatives will believe it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its far more cost effective to defend our current source of energy with the lives of middle and lower class Americans over in the middleast than to look to new sources of energy like wind and solar.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Science like if you have a penis you're a man not a woman? That kind of science?

 

 

Anyone? You progressive retards say men can be women and women can be men. Who are the "science deniers" again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The word science is taken from the Latin scientia which means knowledge. Conservatives consider something to be true when it is proved to be true and can be shown to be true in every case. Liberals have an alternate view of the truth, they believe things are true because one of their friends or Oprah or Bill Mahr said it is true. Global warming may be occurring now, but the planet has been much hotter in the past. The question is what is causing it to get warmer now. This is a cause and effect question and beyond the brainpower of a liberal to understand it. When the scientists PROVE that global warming is caused by human beings, and there is no doubt about it, then the conservatives will believe it.

If you knew anything about science, it's never about 100 % proof.

97% of scientists say there's a 92 % chance that man is the cause of the earth warming.

You can be an ignorant stooge and go with the 3 % er's who have been bought off by Big Oil or the Kich Bros, or listen to the experts.

 

2015 was the warmest year on record, as was 2014 and 2016 is headed down that same road.

But it's all just a coincident to people like you who get their science news from Rush and Fox News.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My mother and I were just discussing this subject yesterday. Anti-Academic rhetoric is intended to discourage critical thinking by providing a bubble or comfort zone. That conditioning is then passed on from parents to children. This conditioning is designed to grow and maintain an ignorant and easily manipulated political base. This is a "Conservative" tradition that dates back centuries, but since the 1980s we've seen a real resurgence of this tactic. I jokingly refer to it as the "Ignorance Pride Movement".

 

My mother is a College Professor at a private University in Pennsylvania and has her Doctorate in Reading and Literacy education. This semester she made one of Glenn Beck's books required reading. She did this for three reasons. First she wanted to show her students how the "other half" thinks. Second, the book was used as an example of poor persuasive writing. Third, the book reveals why it is important to read "critically". Beck makes statistical claims but rarely provides sourcing. No real surprise, he spends most of the book talking in circles. Some of the sources he does provide aren't legitimate sources. Then there are instances where the sources, he claims back up his opinion, actually prove the exact opposite. This was a new lesson plan for 2nd Semester 2016 and it was a complete success. Whoever would have imagined that Glenn Beck could make such an important contribution to the education system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Liberals have an alternate view of the truth, they believe things are true because one of their friends or Oprah or Bill Mahr said it is true.

 

You are wrong. Seriously wrong..

As a Liberal, I believe that humans have caused the Earth to warm up because our actions have increased the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere, and every scientific journal that I know of agrees with this conclusion. I believe that "Conservatives" are greatly influenced by Big Coal, Big Oil and others who want to sell their hydrocarbons off before turning to sustainable sources, because they are greedy.

"Conservatives" don't want to conserve things like the environment when there is a buck to be made. Adapting to new circumstances requires people with creative minds, and conservatives are generally among the least creative people around.

 

Conservatives are the folks who resisted integration from 1957 until the early 1970's.

 

We know what you are (greedy, ignorant or stupid ans occasionally all three) and we know what you have done. Your days are drawing to a close. You are destined to become as extinct as a Taliban, and for many of the same reasons.

 

Science, Scientific American, The National Geographic, even Popular Science magazine all agree that climate change is a reality and is caused by human activity .

 

All the conservatives have is ex-tobacco lawyers, professors at places like Bob Jones "University" and the odd Ponca City, Oklahoma ex weatherman..

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this earlier today and not a single right winger was willing to step up to the plate. Don't bother responding unless you've read it. I will be able to tell and I will make fun of you and then block you. Just consider me a "real debate only zone". If you don't know what that means, go watch a real debate on You Tube. Make sure it is not any of the Republican debates, because this isn't the playground. My time is too valuable to waste on memes or talking points without basis in fact. Discuss the meat and bones of the issue or go read a picture book.

 

 

I guess we will start with what is now covered in most elementary or certainly Junior high science classes. "Global Warming is just one aspect or variable of climate change." Where the temperatures are going up is more important than average Global Temperature increases. For example, In 2014 we saw record high Average Global Temperatures, but the real cause for concern were the extremely high air temperatures over the world's oceans. This in turn caused an increase in Ocean temperatures which helped to fuel east coast winter storms. Boston set a Record of 150 inches for the 2014-2015 winter season. That is an example of short term weather impact of global warming. In 2015 the Pacific Ocean produced 3 category 5 Cyclones at once, a first for the record books. Again this is a short term result of global warming. In case you were wondering, warmer ocean temperatures provide more moisture or fuel for storms developing over them. It is also important to note that the frequency of storms will not necessarily be a short term impact of global warming. Storm severity is the only real measurable short term impact of global warming.

 

The long term impact and/or "Climate Change" begins with understanding compounding effect. For example increased heat and increased water temperature have a compounding effect. This means more ice melt, which leads to a decrease in ocean water salinity, which then leads to greater evaporation of ocean water. This compounds the availability of energy for storms forming or growing over the oceans. The decrease in salinity and changes in ocean temperatures could also disrupt ocean currents. This could lead to a whole host of weather phenomena and permanent weather pattern changes we have never seen and have no way to predict. Then there is the atmospheric variable which is where we became part of the climate equation. This began during the Industrial Revolution, was compounded by over 2000 above ground Nuclear Weapons tests, and continues on to this day as China and India take center stage. This is now being compounded by permafrost melting and its release of large quantities of methane gas. All of these criteria can and will eventually have an effect on both the frequency and severity of storms as well as complete weather pattern changes. I'd say it isn't rocket science but actually Climatology is very complex mathematics. I've only discussed a small % of the endless number of variables. To what degree each variable effects weather and/or climate will always be a work in progress. Variables interacting with other variables and the repercussions that has on the larger weather/climate equation becomes exponentially more complex and seemingly impossible to solve. However, with the rapid advancement in computers we are light years ahead of where we were a decade ago. That is nothing compared to the progress that will come as Quantum Computing becomes a reality.

 

To be fair, I do understand why so many on the political right won't accept Climate Change. Some of them don't care at all, many choose to believe political opinion over scientific fact, and a growing number just don't have the brains for it. Until they're willing to put aside preconceived notions, created by the corporate politicization of the issue, they really are a lost cause. Trying to explain entangled cause and effect relationships to a close minded conservative is more futile than herding cats. If you feel the need though, I'd suggest writing it down and having them read it. Remember to simplify as much as you can. Trying to verbally communicate will just lead to them talking over you before you can complete a single thought. Verbal discussion is more along the lines of teaching a herd of cats how to talk. The vast majority of the right wing base simply isn't reachable when it comes to the subject of climate change. It may very well be the most difficult issue of today. They prefer the simplicity and pleasure of sitting on the couch while they listen to a bleach blonde with fake boobs telling them what to think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. All the racist morons need a political party. That's the gop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer to the thread question is no. As long as the corporate polluters fund republican campaigns and then republicans pose bills to INCREASE pollution to help them out.... They will never bite the hand that feeds them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No you fool, that's called a social issue.

But thanks for proving you're not only science challenged but ignorant to the max about science.

Really? Biological specific displacement is social issue about how to perform as citizens shaping reality on a world stage pretending, defending, protecting ideas anything imagined is possible?

 

@drvoke

 

"Smart idiot", "student of educated stupidity", or society's child cradle to grave? Separate citizenship from genetics before you prove just how false your information is when never connecting to the self evident functions in being self contained to the moment here conception of another ancestor and extinction of a species always only adding together now forever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote



"Outstanding among these attitudes is intellectual dishonesty. When the truth is too unpleasant, a natural tendency is to refuse to believe it.



No matter how clear the evidence is, people can always find an interpretation that will allow them to cling to what they want to believe.



The situation confronting us is dark and fearful. To face the true situation requires courage and honesty. The vast majority of people are quite unwilling to acknowledge the truth, preferring to ignore the evidence, or to select only those facts which will support their preconceived ideas and will not threaten the fulfillment of their desires."



http://www.npr.org/t...oryId=121352495




tea+klux+klan6.jpg



male31-male-smiley-whistle-smiley-emotic



http://www.schwarzre...es-of-communism


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this earlier today and not a single right winger was willing to step up to the plate. Don't bother responding unless you've read it. I will be able to tell and I will make fun of you and then block you. Just consider me a "real debate only zone". If you don't know what that means, go watch a real debate on You Tube. Make sure it is not any of the Republican debates, because this isn't the playground. My time is too valuable to waste on memes or talking points without basis in fact. Discuss the meat and bones of the issue or go read a picture book.

 

 

I guess we will start with what is now covered in most elementary or certainly Junior high science classes. "Global Warming is just one aspect or variable of climate change." Where the temperatures are going up is more important than average Global Temperature increases. For example, In 2014 we saw record high Average Global Temperatures, but the real cause for concern were the extremely high air temperatures over the world's oceans. This in turn caused an increase in Ocean temperatures which helped to fuel east coast winter storms. Boston set a Record of 150 inches for the 2014-2015 winter season. That is an example of short term weather impact of global warming. In 2015 the Pacific Ocean produced 3 category 5 Cyclones at once, a first for the record books. Again this is a short term result of global warming. In case you were wondering, warmer ocean temperatures provide more moisture or fuel for storms developing over them. It is also important to note that the frequency of storms will not necessarily be a short term impact of global warming. Storm severity is the only real measurable short term impact of global warming.

 

The long term impact and/or "Climate Change" begins with understanding compounding effect. For example increased heat and increased water temperature have a compounding effect. This means more ice melt, which leads to a decrease in ocean water salinity, which then leads to greater evaporation of ocean water. This compounds the availability of energy for storms forming or growing over the oceans. The decrease in salinity and changes in ocean temperatures could also disrupt ocean currents. This could lead to a whole host of weather phenomena and permanent weather pattern changes we have never seen and have no way to predict. Then there is the atmospheric variable which is where we became part of the climate equation. This began during the Industrial Revolution, was compounded by over 2000 above ground Nuclear Weapons tests, and continues on to this day as China and India take center stage. This is now being compounded by permafrost melting and its release of large quantities of methane gas. All of these criteria can and will eventually have an effect on both the frequency and severity of storms as well as complete weather pattern changes. I'd say it isn't rocket science but actually Climatology is very complex mathematics. I've only discussed a small % of the endless number of variables. To what degree each variable effects weather and/or climate will always be a work in progress. Variables interacting with other variables and the repercussions that has on the larger weather/climate equation becomes exponentially more complex and seemingly impossible to solve. However, with the rapid advancement in computers we are light years ahead of where we were a decade ago. That is nothing compared to the progress that will come as Quantum Computing becomes a reality.

 

To be fair, I do understand why so many on the political right won't accept Climate Change. Some of them don't care at all, many choose to believe political opinion over scientific fact, and a growing number just don't have the brains for it. Until they're willing to put aside preconceived notions, created by the corporate politicization of the issue, they really are a lost cause. Trying to explain entangled cause and effect relationships to a close minded conservative is more futile than herding cats. If you feel the need though, I'd suggest writing it down and having them read it. Remember to simplify as much as you can. Trying to verbally communicate will just lead to them talking over you before you can complete a single thought. Verbal discussion is more along the lines of teaching a herd of cats how to talk. The vast majority of the right wing base simply isn't reachable when it comes to the subject of climate change. It may very well be the most difficult issue of today. They prefer the simplicity and pleasure of sitting on the couch while they listen to a bleach blonde with fake boobs telling them what to think.

For me, the real reason why I think the whole Climate Change debate is bogus is because the proposed solution is to tax gas consumption.

 

If you were really worried about Climate Change you would be pushing to make a safer alternative cheaper.

 

Cap and Trade will make politicians rich. Cheap fuel that is safe for the environment will benefit the little guy. So politicians shouldn't act like they care when the only solution to the problem is to hurt the little guy.

 

The other problem I have with the debate is that the way it is framed. The left frames the debate by saying the right is denying science. I never really hear the right denying science though. The right's main argument is that not burning oil isn't economically pheasible right now. And their right.

 

So in a sense, the right is in the right and the left is in the wrong as far as the debate is concerned because the right's contention that it isn't economically pheasible is correct and the lefts contention that the right is denying science is false.

 

I think most people agree that climate change is happening they just don't think the situation is as dire as we're being lead to believe because politicians on the left don't seem to be taking things seriously. Their only solution so far has been to tax gas consumption which would hurt regular people and make them rich without actually doing anything significant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The "smart idiot" effect. LOL. That's a new one. It makes sense, but who's kidding who? Most cons are just morons.
(Full article at above link)
This rising distrust of science is particularly high among higher-educated conservatives, in what’s been coined the “smart idiot” effect. Essentially, on complicated scientific subjects like climate change, more highly-educated ideologically-biased individuals possess more tools to fool themselves into denying the science and rejecting the conclusions of experts.

Chris Mooney has attributed these trends to the growth of the ‘religious right’ and other changes in the Republican Party:

Clearly, The Republican War on Science’s politicization thesis is being strongly validated—a thesis that attributes the problem to the growth of a modern conservative movement, its need to appease its core interest groups and constituencies (corporate America, conservative Christians), its need to have its own alternative expertise and journalism (think tanks, Fox, Limbaugh), and so on … as the “New Right” emerged in the U.S. in the wake of the cultural battles of the 1960s and 1970s, it mobilized strong forces of authoritarianism–e.g., psychological rigidity and closed-mindedness.

 

Indeed, authoritarians favor Donald Trump, whose supporters have considerable overlap with climate science denial. Robert Brulle’s research into the ‘dark money’ funding climate denial also helps explain the problem. The Republican Party has become increasingly dependent upon corporate funding and support, which is heavily skewed in the direction of climate denial. The near-total abandonment of party leadership on the climate issue has sent a signal to Republican voters – climate change isn’t a concern, and anyone saying otherwise is part of the hoax.

The growth of this anti-science strain of the Republican Party thus seems to stem from multiple sources: increased party reliance on the religious right and corporate interests, and the growth of a right-wing media echo chamber that feeds anti-scienceconspiratorial thinking.

However, there is good news. For one, climate denial is largely limited to a small and dwindling group of old, white, male conservatives; hence, it’s not a tenable long-term position for the Republican Party. Like opposition to gay marriage, science denial is a position that will increasingly alienate young voters in particular, who will bear the brunt of the consequences of climate inaction.

The party’s chosen path has also resulted in the Donald Trump candidacy, which has GOP leadership in a panic. For these reasons, a rebound away from extreme partisanship and towards reality may be imminent. Already a group of House Republicans signed the Gibson climate change Resolution and formed the bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus, acknowledging the reality of human-caused climate change and the need to do something about it.

Perhaps this blossoming Republican climate leadership will trickle down to reverse the ideologically-based science denial among too many party members.

 

 

 

I don't know of any Republican who denies climate change. The Climate changes everyday. What we deny is the fact that man has anything to do with it. I mean if Man did have anything to do with climate change, wouldn't it make sense for everyone to be going after China which literally has no environmental standards on pollution? India is another heavy duty polluter, why not go after them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Republican politicians are the dumbest fucks in the Western hemisphere, but, in all fairness, they do accurately represent their constituency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the weather changes everyday.

You don't know the diff, you're adrift in a skiff, denying the waterfall, disappearing over that cliff.

Rachel doesn't have to write stuff, the repubs provide all the incredible material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I don't know of any Republican who denies climate change. The Climate changes everyday. What we deny is the fact that man has anything to do with it. I mean if Man did have anything to do with climate change, wouldn't it make sense for everyone to be going after China which literally has no environmental standards on pollution? India is another heavy duty polluter, why not go after them?

 

China and India are the biggest problem right now. If we influence Climate Change? Mankind detonated over 2000 nuclear warheads in the last century. It pretty safe to say that had an impact on our Climate. We have come a long way, but India and China are exponentially worse than we were during the Industrial Revolution. Warming ocean temperatures is creating unprecedented weather events. There were 3 Category 5 Typhoons, at the same time, in the pacific last year. That was a first. Winter 2014-2015 Boston saw a record 150 inches of snow. Coastal Winter Storms tapped into the energy provided by the record high water temperatures over the Atlantic. In both of the last two years, record setting global temperatures were fueled by unprecedented air temperatures over the world's oceans. Where temperatures are changing is far more important than the world wide average. If Ocean temperatures continue to rise, we will see an exponential rise in first time weather events. Every long term climate prediction, even the most conservative estimates, has things pretty bleak by 2050.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most conservatives live in another universe with inconsistent physical laws.

 

....And, sometimes....they paint themselves into a corner!!!

 

April 29, 2016 - "People lived 10 times longer in Biblical times because the Earth’s atmosphere had more oxygen, then."

 

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/04/montana-newspaper-exposes-hilarious-facts-on-display-at-creationist-museum/

roflmao.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "smart idiot" effect. LOL. That's a new one. It makes sense, but who's kidding who? Most Libs are just moronsn Adolescent Socialists, and Academic Communists.

There, FIFY/

Bill Nye, the short time Mechanical Engineer with ZERO climate education...

Bill-Nye-YouTube-300x211.png

...wants to tell YOU about globull warming!

 

 

On the other hand:

 

Global Warming Petition Project

31,487 American scientists have signed this petition,

including 9,029 with PhDs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

No holds barred chat

  • Hey kfools.. does this help? 


  • By Vegas

    Liberals are going to hell.


  • grgle



  • Where’s at @slideman?


  • Hola


  • I know this one, this new chat thing. I've seen it called the "shoutbox" among other things in my past. Very hard to hide from the chat box. The question is asked, there's no time to go search what other folks think, this is real time. Only seconds should be between chat box replies. This one is made for me. In the chat box one has to be quick on their feet with stuff at the ready. This chat box is the worst nightmare of anyone trying to deal with ol' teach. 


  • By pmurT

    hey @teacher that sounds like too much work for me LOL I need that useless thing called *time* in order to authenticate facts and truths which get posted by deceitful Dems


  • What does the red number refer to? currently, on my screen it says 2

     


  • Where does it say 2?


  • So. In the chat....if you tag a member the text afterwards should be a private message. 


  • How do? I'm teacher. If I'm online and the powers that be can figure out how to make it immediately apparent to me that whatever I've said here has been replied to I'm gonna show up right quick and kick some teeth in. It's the chat box, all this is new and scary. I know this gig. This starts now. 



  • Hey kfools, did you lose your securtiy cert? On my browser it is saying your site is not secure?


  • Mine too. I'm looking into it.


  • Mine too. 


  • I thought it was my location.. 


  • Just gave to renew the security cert. No big deal I'll do it tonight


  • OK thanks

     



  • By Blue Devil

    Happy Anniversary, America... on your Civil Union.


  • By teacher

    All lives matter.


  • By teacher

    Double post deleted.


You don't have permission to chat in this chatroom
×
×
  • Create New...