Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Modern Science Writers Leave Science Behind
Pacific Standard ^ | December 28, 2012 | Alex B. Berezow

Posted on 12/29/2012 2:12:28 PM PST by neverdem

The co-author of a book on partisan science recently examined by Pacific Standard argues that our reviewer was a little too partisan himself.

Any book that touches upon politics almost automatically angers half of the American public, regardless of what is written inside of it. It takes a special person—an objective, open-minded and self-critical one—to read and learn from a science book that criticizes people with whom the reader likes and agrees with politically.

Recently, Pacific Standard published a review (“Red Science, Blue Science,” January/February 2013) by Wray Herbert, a pop psychology writer,of political writer Chris Mooney’s book The Republican Brain and my new book, Science Left Behind, which I co-authored with Hank Campbell.

Herbert fawned over Mooney’s book, the primary thrust of which is that psychology, neuroscience, and genetics explain why Republicans are “smart idiots” and reality deniers. Herbert found Mooney’s book “convincing,” despite the fact that few (if any) scientists would agree. In fact, Mooney’s main premise has been roundly debunked as pseudoscientific nonsense by a neuroscientist, a biochemist, and high-profile evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne. As described in the New York Times, such critics resent the “bastardization [of neuroscience] by glib, sometimes ill-informed, popularizers.”

Similarly, our book makes the point—among many others—that such politicization of science illustrates everything that is wrong with modern science journalism. In our chapter “The Death of Science Journalism,” we discuss how too many science writers have morphed into cheerleaders who uncritically embrace progressive political causes at the expense of good science. For these writers, science isn’t about uncovering the wonders of the natural world; instead, it’s just another platform from which to bash and demonize political opponents. We believe such journalistic malpractice epitomizes science writing at its absolute worst.

Therefore, it is not a surprise that Herbert—who clearly sympathizes with Mooney’s career-long vendetta against Republicans—would find our book “petty” and “small-minded.” His emotional response indicates nothing more than his displeasure that our book criticized writers like him.

My co-author and I clearly possess a very different science writing philosophy. We believe in order for science journalism to thrive, it must primarily focus on reporting science, not politics. And most importantly, writers should be as objective as possible, fighting for Team Science instead of dedicating their careers to promoting Team Red or Team Blue.

In partial fulfillment of this mission, we chose to address an enormous myth that circulates in our media culture; namely, the idea that conservatives are uniquely anti-science and progressives are uniquely pro-science. Nothing could be further from reality.

It is certainly true that some conservatives embrace anti-scientific beliefs, most notably on evolution and climate change. But some progressives also adhere to a set of dangerous anti-scientific beliefs.

For instance, the destructive anti-vaccine movement has a long association with the progressive left. To deny that is simply to ignore history. The progressive outlet Huffington Post, where Mr. Herbert now writes, is regularly mocked in the scientific community for advancing anti-vaccine propaganda and embracing alternative medicine.

Furthermore, in 2005, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. infamously wrote an article for Rolling Stone and Salon (since retracted) that erroneously linked vaccines to autism, a claim that, even then, had been thoroughly debunked by the scientific establishment. In 2008, while on the campaign trail, Sen. Barack Obama repeated the myth, and as president in 2009, his administration’s pandering to the anti-vaccine crowd was partially to blame for the H1N1 influenza vaccine shortage that occurred later that year. To this day, influential progressive commentator Bill Maher regularly spouts anti-vaccine and anti-Western medicine paranoia on his television program.

But this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Scientists see water fluoridation, which particularly benefits the poor, as a major public health triumph. But not progressive activists in Portland, Oregon, who fought to prevent the fluoridation of their city’s water supply.

Mainstream progressive environmental groups such as Greenpeace and the Union of Concerned Scientists also oppose genetic modification, despite its tremendous life-saving potential in areas such as preventing vitamin A deficiency, a disease that blinds 250,000 to 500,000 children every year and kills half of them. The California Democratic Party, in direct opposition to the American Medical Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, endorsed that state’s Proposition 37, a referendum that would have unscientifically required the labeling of genetically modified food.

Despite the fact that thousands of deaths in the U.S. are attributable to the pollution produced by burning fossil fuels each year, progressives oppose energy policies that could reduce our dependency on coal and oil. Progressives historically have been anti-nuclear power, and today, they are opposed to natural gas, a much cleaner fossil fuel. Instead, they embrace wind and solar, neither of which are currently capable of meeting the world’s growing energy demand.

Public health, biotechnology and energy directly impact our lives and livelihoods, and they represent just a few of the important topics we address in our book. As we demonstrate, progressives routinely come down on the wrong side of those and other issues.

Anyone who is willing to take off his partisan glasses will quickly come to the conclusion that both sides of the political spectrum—conservatives and progressives—are willing to throw science under the bus whenever it is politically expedient.

It’s too bad that some members of the allegedly “watchdog” media are too blinded by their own partisan affiliations to do their jobs properly.

About Alex B. Berezow

Dr. Alex B. Berezow is the editor of RealClearScience and co-author of Science Left Behind. He holds a Ph.D. in microbiology. His work has appeared in CNN, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The Economist, and Forbes, among other outlets. Follow him on Twitter @AlexBerezow



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aaac; alexbberezow; ama; antivaccine; autism; billmaher; catastrophism; chrismooney; cnn; fluoridation; forbes; godsgravesglyphs; greenpeace; h1n1influenza; hankcampbell; huffpo; jerrycoyne; newyorktimes; oregon; pacificstandard; pages; portland; proposition37; realclearscience; robertfkennedyjr; rollingstone; salon; science; scienceleftbehind; sciencewriters; stringtheory; theeconomist; therepublicanbrain; usatoday; vitamina; wallstreetjournal; wrayherbert; xplanets

1 posted on 12/29/2012 2:12:40 PM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem
But this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Scientists see water fluoridation, which particularly benefits the poor, as a major public health triumph. But not progressive activists in Portland, Oregon, who fought to prevent the fluoridation of their city’s water supply.

The Jon Birch Society thought fluoridation was a fiendish Commie plot.

Go far enough to the Left and Right and you end up in the same looney-tunes science-hating place.

2 posted on 12/29/2012 2:27:14 PM PST by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

They’re doing a great deal of damage on both sides.

They’re causing conservatives to simply discount good science and causing liberals to have “faith” in junk science.


3 posted on 12/29/2012 2:30:13 PM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

If you support fluoridation, what other pharmaceuticals would you support the government adding to your water supply?


4 posted on 12/29/2012 2:40:07 PM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

Fiendish Flouridators - power 3 / resistance 5 / fanatic

[bump for the card game Illuminati]


5 posted on 12/29/2012 2:54:44 PM PST by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
If you support fluoridation, what other pharmaceuticals would you support the government adding to your water supply?

Iodine in your salt has been there for years...prevents goiter.....seen anyone lately with a growth in their neck???

6 posted on 12/29/2012 2:56:08 PM PST by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
If you support fluoridation, what other pharmaceuticals would you support the government adding to your water supply?

VIAGRA would be helpful!!!

7 posted on 12/29/2012 2:58:03 PM PST by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcHNYenN7OY
8 posted on 12/29/2012 3:02:10 PM PST by palmer (Obama = Carter + affirmative action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

“Go far enough to the Left and Right and you end up in the same looney-tunes science-hating place.”

A popular notion, but, unfortunately, incorrect.

Firstly, the Birchers were right that a number of fiendish communist plots were in play. They were wrong about fluoride, but that doesn’t mean either that they hated science or that suspicion of fluoridation is particularly right-wing. The original article noted that it is the leftards who are fighting fluoridation in Portland.

Secondly, our Aristotelian model, with the golden mean in the middle and decreasing merit as one proceeds in either direction therefrom, is also incorrect.

The spectrum stretches from God on the right to Satan on the left. There is no “center,” and no one could possibly get far enough to the right.


9 posted on 12/29/2012 3:05:42 PM PST by dsc (Any attempt to move a government to the left is a crime against humanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

If you deny that a baby in the womb is human, then you are a science hater.


10 posted on 12/29/2012 3:06:26 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

>> Mooney’s book [explains] why Republicans are “smart idiots” and reality deniers. Herbert found Mooney’s book “convincing,”

This registered Republican would like to know 1) how these tools scored on their SATs, 2) their college grades in physics and mathematics, and 3) their IQs.


11 posted on 12/29/2012 3:10:19 PM PST by Gene Eric (Demoralization is a weapon of the enemy. Don't get it, don't spread it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: terycarl
seen anyone lately with a growth in their neck???

In The Hobbit, the Great Goblin has a Great Goiter.

12 posted on 12/29/2012 3:29:39 PM PST by JohnBovenmyer (Obama been Liberal. Hope Change!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dsc

I’m a regular old rabid right wing extremists and I love science.


13 posted on 12/29/2012 3:39:05 PM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: Pollster1
As an outdoorsman, I am pro-environment (for real, not the Park Avenue liberal anti-American version of environmentalism)

Yup, there's a reason I live in the country.
15 posted on 12/29/2012 4:10:40 PM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

“Iodine in your salt has been there for years...prevents goiter.....seen anyone lately with a growth in their neck??? “

You are seriously confused.

Iodine is a necessary nutrient. Flouride is toxic to humans.

Flouride is not used in most of Europe and parts of Canada. Those areas have no more problem with cavities than the U.S.


16 posted on 12/29/2012 5:18:06 PM PST by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

Yep, and they are tacitly admitting their superstorm and superdrought claims are bogus. They don’t admit (and some don’t realize) that environmental protection is made possible only by economic growth. They don’t admit (or understand) that their “atmospheric commons” that has allegedly been filled with heat trapping gases by the evil capitalists (mostly the US) is actually a heat engine. Heat trapping gases have a role but not a very big one.


17 posted on 12/29/2012 5:19:03 PM PST by palmer (Obama = Carter + affirmative action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

I object to the fluoridation of water because it is a mass medical experiment done without the consent of th subject.


18 posted on 12/29/2012 5:22:49 PM PST by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

I have the ability to purchase salt without iodine. I do not have that option with my municipal water supply. Nice try.


19 posted on 12/29/2012 5:24:25 PM PST by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: terycarl
I'm aware of the iodine in table salt, and I take it willingly. (I remember a lot of older people having goiters, when I was young.) However, I also have the option of buying salt without iodine (e.g. pickling salt).

I'm also aware of the benefits of fluoridated water -- having grown up on well water. The municipal water here isn't fluoridated, so I use fluoridated mouth wash twice daily. The issue isn't whether or not fluoridation is beneficial -- the issue is the government medicating our drinking water. It's a slippery-slope issue. People should have the right to chose whether or not to take a medicine.
20 posted on 12/29/2012 5:44:06 PM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: terycarl
Would that result in more upstanding citizens?
21 posted on 12/29/2012 5:52:07 PM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
It is certainly true that some conservatives embrace anti-scientific beliefs, most notably on evolution and climate change.

Dr. Alex B. Berezow is the editor of RealClearScience and co-author of Science Left Behind. He holds a Ph.D. in microbiology.



Dr. Berezow needs to brush up on his 'Climate Science' before casting aspersions on the many quite learned scientists who dispute AGW/Globull Warming/Man Made Climate Change.
22 posted on 12/29/2012 6:10:19 PM PST by rottndog (Be Prepared.....for what's coming AFTER America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
If you support fluoridation, what other pharmaceuticals would you support the government adding to your water supply?

How about a little chlorine? Chlorination of water supplies has prevented hundreds of millions of cases of various types of water-borne diseases that killed millions in the past.

Yes...I'll take some chlorine in my water. If you choose to give the matter just a bit of thought, you'll probably make the same choice also.
23 posted on 12/29/2012 7:13:26 PM PST by Milton Miteybad (I am Jim Thompson. {Really.})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
have the ability to purchase salt without iodine. I do not have that option with my municipal water supply. Nice try.

such nonsense, iodine doesn't hurt your washing machine, your shower, washing your car, watering your lawn...if you are so concerned with iodine in your drinking water.....buy a gallon or so of spring, or distilled water to drink....many people do and it isn't the fear of iodine that persuaded them to do so.

and by the way, the original discussion had to do with the government adding something to the food chain.....they added flouride and they added iodine, you like iodine, I like both.

24 posted on 12/29/2012 7:15:26 PM PST by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
Flouride is not used in most of Europe and parts of Canada. Those areas have no more problem with cavities than the U.S.

I have no way of knowing the exact figures, but I am almost certain that dental caries were reduced by more than 60% when flouride was introduced into our water

25 posted on 12/29/2012 7:25:42 PM PST by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
Flouride is not used in most of Europe and parts of Canada. Those areas have no more problem with cavities than the U.S.

I have no way of knowing the exact figures, but I am almost certain that dental caries were reduced by more than 60% when flouride was introduced into our water

26 posted on 12/29/2012 7:26:41 PM PST by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: terycarl

If you like fluoride in your water then by all means by your own and fluoridate to your hearts content. But please leave me out of it. Is that too much to ask? Why can’t people like you just leave people like me the hell alone?

What’s wrong with you? Wy do you feel the need to stick your stupid nose into every facet of people’s lives? If you want your water fluoridated and your salt iodized, fine. Let the market place cater to your desires. But for the love of God don’t force other people into your personal lifestyle choices because you think it’s “good” for us.

It’s busy bodies like you that have brought this country to where it is today.


27 posted on 12/29/2012 7:40:08 PM PST by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
It’s busy bodies like you that have brought this country to where it is today.

Bah, humbug....I didn't put anything in your food, the government did and in most cases I didn't vote for them. By the way, you also get folic acid in your bread and cereal, and vitamin D in your milk....all of which are good for you!!!

28 posted on 12/29/2012 7:50:38 PM PST by terycarl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
It is certainly true that some conservatives embrace anti-scientific beliefs, most notably on evolution and climate change.

Evolution and "climate change(TM)" are both ideological doctrines masquerading as science theories and people defending them are basically charlatans.

29 posted on 12/30/2012 4:26:00 AM PST by varmintman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
It is certainly true that some conservatives embrace anti-scientific beliefs, most notably on evolution and climate change. But some progressives also adhere to a set of dangerous anti-scientific beliefs.

When you go far enough in either direction, the anti-science beliefs tend to converge. On the right, anti-science takes the form of believing that God said a word and everything sprang into existence, with plants and animals popping fully formed out of dirt or water. On the left, anti-science takes the form of believing that aliens came to an existing earth and made all living things. On some issues, beliefs on the left and right are indistinguishable (for example, the anti-vaccination movement).

There is clearly a desperate need to bring up the level of scientific literacy in this country. Teaching people how to think critically and logically would help a lot, too.

30 posted on 12/30/2012 6:39:11 AM PST by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Facts, they don’t need no stinking facts.


31 posted on 12/30/2012 6:42:43 AM PST by bmwcyle (We have gone over the cliff and we are about to hit the bottom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Milton Miteybad

Chlorine is added to kill harmful microbes in the water. It’s there to treat the water, not the drinker of the water. See the difference? It’s important.

Yes chlorination of water has been beneficial (although it’s not the only alternative for water purification) — but, it comes at a cost. Compounds of chlorine in treated water are proven carcinogens. I filter the stuff out of my drinking water. If you do some research on the topic, and give it some thought, you’ll probably make the same choice too.


32 posted on 12/30/2012 11:29:49 AM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks neverdem. Alex B. Berezow:
Herbert fawned over Mooney’s book, the primary thrust of which is that psychology, neuroscience, and genetics explain why Republicans are “smart idiots” and reality deniers. Herbert found Mooney’s book “convincing,” despite the fact that few (if any) scientists would agree... As described in the New York Times, such critics resent the “bastardization [of neuroscience] by glib, sometimes ill-informed, popularizers.” ...In partial fulfillment of this mission, we chose to address an enormous myth that circulates in our media culture; namely, the idea that conservatives are uniquely anti-science and progressives are uniquely pro-science. Nothing could be further from reality... the destructive anti-vaccine movement has a long association with the progressive left. To deny that is simply to ignore history... in 2005, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. infamously wrote an article for Rolling Stone and Salon (since retracted) that erroneously linked vaccines to autism... In 2008... Obama repeated the myth, and as president in 2009, his administration’s pandering to the anti-vaccine crowd was partially to blame for the H1N1 influenza vaccine shortage.. Bill Maher regularly spouts anti-vaccine and anti-Western medicine paranoia... Scientists see water fluoridation, which particularly benefits the poor, as a major public health triumph. But not progressive activists in Portland, Oregon, who fought to prevent the fluoridation of their city’s water supply... Greenpeace and the Union of Concerned Scientists [et al] also oppose genetic modification, despite its tremendous life-saving potential in areas such as preventing vitamin A deficiency, a disease that blinds 250,000 to 500,000 children every year and kills half of them. The California Democratic Party, in direct opposition to the American Medical Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, endorsed that state’s Proposition 37, a referendum that would have unscientifically required the labeling of genetically modified food. Despite the fact that thousands of deaths in the U.S. are attributable to the pollution produced by burning fossil fuels each year, progressives oppose energy policies that could reduce our dependency on coal and oil. Progressives historically have been anti-nuclear power, and today, they are opposed to natural gas, a much cleaner fossil fuel. Instead, they embrace wind and solar, neither of which are currently capable of meeting the world’s growing energy demand... progressives routinely come down on the wrong side of those and other issues.

33 posted on 04/07/2013 11:07:04 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: brytlea; cripplecreek; decimon; bigheadfred; KoRn; Grammy; married21; steelyourfaith; Mmogamer; ...

Thanks neverdem. Extra to APoD members. Alex B. Berezow:
Herbert fawned over Mooney’s book, the primary thrust of which is that psychology, neuroscience, and genetics explain why Republicans are “smart idiots” and reality deniers. Herbert found Mooney’s book “convincing,” despite the fact that few (if any) scientists would agree... As described in the New York Times, such critics resent the “bastardization [of neuroscience] by glib, sometimes ill-informed, popularizers.” ...In partial fulfillment of this mission, we chose to address an enormous myth that circulates in our media culture; namely, the idea that conservatives are uniquely anti-science and progressives are uniquely pro-science. Nothing could be further from reality... the destructive anti-vaccine movement has a long association with the progressive left. To deny that is simply to ignore history... in 2005, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. infamously wrote an article for Rolling Stone and Salon (since retracted) that erroneously linked vaccines to autism... In 2008... Obama repeated the myth, and as president in 2009, his administration’s pandering to the anti-vaccine crowd was partially to blame for the H1N1 influenza vaccine shortage.. Bill Maher regularly spouts anti-vaccine and anti-Western medicine paranoia... Scientists see water fluoridation, which particularly benefits the poor, as a major public health triumph. But not progressive activists in Portland, Oregon, who fought to prevent the fluoridation of their city’s water supply... Greenpeace and the Union of Concerned Scientists [et al] also oppose genetic modification, despite its tremendous life-saving potential in areas such as preventing vitamin A deficiency, a disease that blinds 250,000 to 500,000 children every year and kills half of them. The California Democratic Party, in direct opposition to the American Medical Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, endorsed that state’s Proposition 37, a referendum that would have unscientifically required the labeling of genetically modified food. Despite the fact that thousands of deaths in the U.S. are attributable to the pollution produced by burning fossil fuels each year, progressives oppose energy policies that could reduce our dependency on coal and oil. Progressives historically have been anti-nuclear power, and today, they are opposed to natural gas, a much cleaner fossil fuel. Instead, they embrace wind and solar, neither of which are currently capable of meeting the world’s growing energy demand... progressives routinely come down on the wrong side of those and other issues.

34 posted on 04/07/2013 11:07:58 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 75thOVI; agrace; aimhigh; Alice in Wonderland; AndrewC; aragorn; aristotleman; Avoiding_Sulla; ...

Thanks neverdem. Alex B. Berezow:
Herbert fawned over Mooney’s book, the primary thrust of which is that psychology, neuroscience, and genetics explain why Republicans are “smart idiots” and reality deniers. Herbert found Mooney’s book “convincing,” despite the fact that few (if any) scientists would agree... As described in the New York Times, such critics resent the “bastardization [of neuroscience] by glib, sometimes ill-informed, popularizers.” ...In partial fulfillment of this mission, we chose to address an enormous myth that circulates in our media culture; namely, the idea that conservatives are uniquely anti-science and progressives are uniquely pro-science. Nothing could be further from reality... the destructive anti-vaccine movement has a long association with the progressive left. To deny that is simply to ignore history... in 2005, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. infamously wrote an article for Rolling Stone and Salon (since retracted) that erroneously linked vaccines to autism... In 2008... Obama repeated the myth, and as president in 2009, his administration’s pandering to the anti-vaccine crowd was partially to blame for the H1N1 influenza vaccine shortage.. Bill Maher regularly spouts anti-vaccine and anti-Western medicine paranoia... Scientists see water fluoridation, which particularly benefits the poor, as a major public health triumph. But not progressive activists in Portland, Oregon, who fought to prevent the fluoridation of their city’s water supply... Greenpeace and the Union of Concerned Scientists [et al] also oppose genetic modification, despite its tremendous life-saving potential in areas such as preventing vitamin A deficiency, a disease that blinds 250,000 to 500,000 children every year and kills half of them. The California Democratic Party, in direct opposition to the American Medical Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, endorsed that state’s Proposition 37, a referendum that would have unscientifically required the labeling of genetically modified food. Despite the fact that thousands of deaths in the U.S. are attributable to the pollution produced by burning fossil fuels each year, progressives oppose energy policies that could reduce our dependency on coal and oil. Progressives historically have been anti-nuclear power, and today, they are opposed to natural gas, a much cleaner fossil fuel. Instead, they embrace wind and solar, neither of which are currently capable of meeting the world’s growing energy demand... progressives routinely come down on the wrong side of those and other issues.



35 posted on 04/07/2013 11:08:22 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 6SJ7; AdmSmith; AFPhys; Arkinsaw; allmost; aristotleman; autumnraine; Beowulf; Bones75; BroJoeK; ...

Thanks neverdem. Alex B. Berezow:
Herbert fawned over Mooney’s book, the primary thrust of which is that psychology, neuroscience, and genetics explain why Republicans are “smart idiots” and reality deniers. Herbert found Mooney’s book “convincing,” despite the fact that few (if any) scientists would agree... As described in the New York Times, such critics resent the “bastardization [of neuroscience] by glib, sometimes ill-informed, popularizers.” ...In partial fulfillment of this mission, we chose to address an enormous myth that circulates in our media culture; namely, the idea that conservatives are uniquely anti-science and progressives are uniquely pro-science. Nothing could be further from reality... the destructive anti-vaccine movement has a long association with the progressive left. To deny that is simply to ignore history... in 2005, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. infamously wrote an article for Rolling Stone and Salon (since retracted) that erroneously linked vaccines to autism... In 2008... Obama repeated the myth, and as president in 2009, his administration’s pandering to the anti-vaccine crowd was partially to blame for the H1N1 influenza vaccine shortage.. Bill Maher regularly spouts anti-vaccine and anti-Western medicine paranoia... Scientists see water fluoridation, which particularly benefits the poor, as a major public health triumph. But not progressive activists in Portland, Oregon, who fought to prevent the fluoridation of their city’s water supply... Greenpeace and the Union of Concerned Scientists [et al] also oppose genetic modification, despite its tremendous life-saving potential in areas such as preventing vitamin A deficiency, a disease that blinds 250,000 to 500,000 children every year and kills half of them. The California Democratic Party, in direct opposition to the American Medical Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, endorsed that state’s Proposition 37, a referendum that would have unscientifically required the labeling of genetically modified food. Despite the fact that thousands of deaths in the U.S. are attributable to the pollution produced by burning fossil fuels each year, progressives oppose energy policies that could reduce our dependency on coal and oil. Progressives historically have been anti-nuclear power, and today, they are opposed to natural gas, a much cleaner fossil fuel. Instead, they embrace wind and solar, neither of which are currently capable of meeting the world’s growing energy demand... progressives routinely come down on the wrong side of those and other issues.


· List topics · post a topic · subscribe · Google ·

36 posted on 04/07/2013 11:08:57 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: StayAt HomeMother; Ernest_at_the_Beach; decimon; 1010RD; 21twelve; 24Karet; 2ndDivisionVet; ...

 GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach

Thanks neverdem. Alex B. Berezow:
Herbert fawned over Mooney’s book, the primary thrust of which is that psychology, neuroscience, and genetics explain why Republicans are “smart idiots” and reality deniers. Herbert found Mooney’s book “convincing,” despite the fact that few (if any) scientists would agree... As described in the New York Times, such critics resent the “bastardization [of neuroscience] by glib, sometimes ill-informed, popularizers.” ...In partial fulfillment of this mission, we chose to address an enormous myth that circulates in our media culture; namely, the idea that conservatives are uniquely anti-science and progressives are uniquely pro-science. Nothing could be further from reality... the destructive anti-vaccine movement has a long association with the progressive left. To deny that is simply to ignore history... in 2005, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. infamously wrote an article for Rolling Stone and Salon (since retracted) that erroneously linked vaccines to autism... In 2008... Obama repeated the myth, and as president in 2009, his administration’s pandering to the anti-vaccine crowd was partially to blame for the H1N1 influenza vaccine shortage.. Bill Maher regularly spouts anti-vaccine and anti-Western medicine paranoia... Scientists see water fluoridation, which particularly benefits the poor, as a major public health triumph. But not progressive activists in Portland, Oregon, who fought to prevent the fluoridation of their city’s water supply... Greenpeace and the Union of Concerned Scientists [et al] also oppose genetic modification, despite its tremendous life-saving potential in areas such as preventing vitamin A deficiency, a disease that blinds 250,000 to 500,000 children every year and kills half of them. The California Democratic Party, in direct opposition to the American Medical Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, endorsed that state’s Proposition 37, a referendum that would have unscientifically required the labeling of genetically modified food. Despite the fact that thousands of deaths in the U.S. are attributable to the pollution produced by burning fossil fuels each year, progressives oppose energy policies that could reduce our dependency on coal and oil. Progressives historically have been anti-nuclear power, and today, they are opposed to natural gas, a much cleaner fossil fuel. Instead, they embrace wind and solar, neither of which are currently capable of meeting the world’s growing energy demand... progressives routinely come down on the wrong side of those and other issues.
Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.


37 posted on 04/07/2013 11:09:44 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis; annie laurie; Knitting A Conundrum; Viking2002; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Mmogamer; ...

Thanks neverdem. Alex B. Berezow:
Herbert fawned over Mooney’s book, the primary thrust of which is that psychology, neuroscience, and genetics explain why Republicans are “smart idiots” and reality deniers. Herbert found Mooney’s book “convincing,” despite the fact that few (if any) scientists would agree... As described in the New York Times, such critics resent the “bastardization [of neuroscience] by glib, sometimes ill-informed, popularizers.” ...In partial fulfillment of this mission, we chose to address an enormous myth that circulates in our media culture; namely, the idea that conservatives are uniquely anti-science and progressives are uniquely pro-science. Nothing could be further from reality... the destructive anti-vaccine movement has a long association with the progressive left. To deny that is simply to ignore history... in 2005, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. infamously wrote an article for Rolling Stone and Salon (since retracted) that erroneously linked vaccines to autism... In 2008... Obama repeated the myth, and as president in 2009, his administration’s pandering to the anti-vaccine crowd was partially to blame for the H1N1 influenza vaccine shortage.. Bill Maher regularly spouts anti-vaccine and anti-Western medicine paranoia... Scientists see water fluoridation, which particularly benefits the poor, as a major public health triumph. But not progressive activists in Portland, Oregon, who fought to prevent the fluoridation of their city’s water supply... Greenpeace and the Union of Concerned Scientists [et al] also oppose genetic modification, despite its tremendous life-saving potential in areas such as preventing vitamin A deficiency, a disease that blinds 250,000 to 500,000 children every year and kills half of them. The California Democratic Party, in direct opposition to the American Medical Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, endorsed that state’s Proposition 37, a referendum that would have unscientifically required the labeling of genetically modified food. Despite the fact that thousands of deaths in the U.S. are attributable to the pollution produced by burning fossil fuels each year, progressives oppose energy policies that could reduce our dependency on coal and oil. Progressives historically have been anti-nuclear power, and today, they are opposed to natural gas, a much cleaner fossil fuel. Instead, they embrace wind and solar, neither of which are currently capable of meeting the world’s growing energy demand... progressives routinely come down on the wrong side of those and other issues.
 
X-Planets
· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe ·
Google news searches: exoplanet · exosolar · extrasolar ·

38 posted on 04/07/2013 11:10:02 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Romney would have been worse, if you're a dumb ass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: webstersII
Flouride is toxic to humans.

Then it's really a good thing that we add fluoride to our drinking water, not flouride.

39 posted on 04/07/2013 12:22:43 PM PDT by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx

Then it’s really a good thing we have people to play the part of school-marm.


40 posted on 04/07/2013 1:19:49 PM PDT by MetaThought
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

Excellent and true. Science Left Behind is a very good read.


41 posted on 04/07/2013 4:35:18 PM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Another example: “Guns, Germs and Steel”. Short premise is: why did civilization develop in some areas but not others, accelerate in certain areas but not others and a few reach great heights? Civilization required high calorie domesticable grains, which many areas lacked. Agriculture provided the way to support a population, but draft animals provided labor. The Maya and Inca were held back by having no large draft animals, only the llama and dogs.
Then for civilization to truly advance, you need cultural interchange. Why reinvent the wheel if you can learn about it from your neighbors? China and India exchanged ideas with the Middle East. North Africa, the Romans and the Middle East exchanged ideas. This is why China, India and the Mediterranean reached the heights of civilization while MesoAmerica was one to two millennia behind - a lack of cultural interchange.
Sound theory, reasonable premises.

Now skip to the same author’s book. Stone age children rearing is superior to modern child raising, except for the child abuse, child mortality and lack of hygiene. No scientific studies to back his claims, only lots of anecdotes. “They seem happier,” though many children have burns on their fingers as a testament to parents letting them learn through painful experience to stay away from fire. Nor does he mention that many girls are raped while boys “naturally figure out sex”.


42 posted on 04/08/2013 7:33:51 PM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; neverdem
There's lots more lefty junk science he leaves out.

There's Silent Spring and the outlawing of DDT, based entirely on junk science. That alone has lead to millions of malaria deaths.

How about the junk science over IUD's and silicone breast implants? So much for the Left believing women should have the final say about their bodies.

Or the biggest hoax of all, going all the way back to the 18th Century - the population bomb. Malthus and Ehrlich claimed population increased exponentially but food production only arithmetically. They were wrong about the latter. Average daily calorie intake worldwide has increased ever since the end of WWII and will continue to increase unless the Left manages to destroy the Green Revolution, which they are trying to do. Oh, and even the UN admits worldwide population will level off by 2050.

43 posted on 04/10/2013 3:38:56 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson