Posted on 10/18/2013 3:05:34 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Via the Independent Journal Review, I meant to post this yesterday but got sidetracked by the Healthcare.gov Chernobyl.
Tea partiers are as far ahead of the science curve relative to the general population, Yale professor Dan Kahan’s data shows, as liberal Democrats are relative to conservative Republicans. It’s a small difference, but it’s there — and so sharply contrary is it to the left’s view of TPers that Kahan felt obliged to acknowledge that fact explicitly.
I’ve got to confess, though, I found this result surprising. As I pushed the button to run the analysis on my computer, I fully expected I’d be shown a modest negative correlation between identifying with the Tea Party and science comprehension.
But then again, I don’t know a single person who identifies with the Tea Party. All my impressions come from watching cable tv — & I don’t watch Fox News very often — and reading the “paper” (New York Times daily, plus a variety of politics-focused internet sites like Huffington Post & Politico).
I’m a little embarrassed, but mainly I’m just glad that I no longer hold this particular mistaken view…
I’ll now be much less surprised, too, if it turns out that someone I meet at, say, the Museum of Science in Boston, or the Chabot Space and Science Museum in Oakland, or the Museum of Science and Industry in Chicago is part of the 20% (geez– I must know some of them) who would answer “yes” when asked if he or she identifies with the Tea Party. If the person is there, then it will almost certainly be the case that that he or she & I will agree on how cool the stuff is at the museum, even if we don’t agree about many other matters of consequence.
Rest assured, he says, he still views the tea party in “very negative” moral and political terms, but they’re better read than he thought. I don’t know why he’s surprised, though: One of the very first major media polls conducted back in 2010, when the movement was coalescing, found even at the time that tea partiers are wealthier and better educated than the population at large. TPers are in the first column here, then “all respondents,” and then the difference between them:
Go figure that people who have more education will do better on science questions. Don’t forget either that tea partiers skew older, and older Americans may have absorbed more science in their reading over time than younger ones have. Pew Research flagged that as a partial explanation, in fact, back in April 2012 when it found that Republicans outperformed Democrats on average in a test of political knowledge. And while I don’t have data handy to support this, I’d guess that voters who are politically active generally, wherever they lie on the ideological spectrum, are probably better educated (even if self-educated) on average than the rest of the population. If you’re engaged deeply with political ideas, you’re probably engaged with other types of ideas too. If you’re reading widely about news and politics, you’re probably reading about unrelated subjects in your intellectual travels. I stumble across interesting science news all the time in putting together “Headlines,” for instance, not because I’m hunting for it but because I’ll spot it on a site that I happen to be visiting for political coverage. Maybe that bleed-over effect was different (or, rather, less pronounced) before the information age but now, if you’re surfing around on news and political sites, stories on far-flung subjects are almost impossible to avoid. I’d bet lefty activists also tend to skew a tiny bit higher than the population in science knowledge than the rest of the population for that same reason. A news junkie’s a news junkie, even one who specializes.
the results are not surprising to me... that they have been published is...
The “average Tea Partyer” is like light years ahead of any liberal
If one was smart he/whe wouldn’t be a liberal in the first place
The average TEA Partier knows WAY more than Gore...or at least more than he pretends to know about Science. I'm thoroughly convinced that he knows he's promoting a scam.
I'm surprised that TEA Partiers are not in the lead by 200% to 300% more knowledge than Democrats based on what they believe.
Its not hard to figure out if a liberal is willing to look outside the bubble.
There a plenty of threads about astronomy, physics, technology, archeology etc at FR every single day.
How long until this study disappears?
Everybody knows that conservatives and Tea Party types are anti-science. (sarcasm)
“Rest assured, he says, he still views the tea party in “very negative” moral and political terms, but they’re better read than he thought.”
_____________________________________________
Typical of an elitist, snotty-nosed. Commie.
Negative moral terms? A Marxist has no morals, but loyalty to the party.
Better read then he thought? He does not know how to think. He is a trained mouse.
What?!
That’s unpossible!!
If we can continue to copy it onto blogs, and if possible copy the PDf of the original study, we can make certain that it never disappears.
Average Tea Partier has an I.Q. a hundred points higher than the dummicrats.
Eliminate the intellectuals! (as Premier Odumbo will say)
“Rest assured, he says, he still views the tea party in “very negative” moral and political terms, but they’re better read than he thought.”
This is actually the crux of the issue even if leftist don’t realize it. Leftist are reacting against what they perceive to be moral constraints they believe to be outmoded, old fashioned or nonscientific that they don’t want to follow. That is why the left like Christian groups like Almish. The Almish stay on the farm and are “quaint” enough to not be taken seriously. People that live a moral ethical life in the modern world expose the problems the leftist have in their lives and so judge the immoral and unethical Leftist by simply living moral ethical lives. Just living a moral life is an affront to a leftist because it reveals their depravity. Since they don’t like to be confronted with this they call it evil and turn morals upside down. In doing this I believe, at some level they become insane.
Leftism is like Islam in that both ideologies are held together by force, group think and by suppressing ideas that do not fit the paradigm. I believe this is one of the reasons that the left in the West has less problems intolerant Islam than it does with liberal Christians. The Islamist and the Socialist use the same logic to underpin their worldview.
Leftist believe that they are more moral, more enlightened and more educated. They associate their beliefs with greater intelligence, tolerance and and education. If they admit that their opponents are as intelligent, tolerant and educated as they the whole system begins to fall apart because they have to respond to argument with facts not simply ideology. Since they really have no supporting facts they can’t really do that. This leads them to support things that are simply insane.
This is why I say you often cannot argue with a leftist. They function on an internal logic that is at its most basic level flawed. They are illogical and irrational but function within a self contained paradigm. They must be forced to leave that paradigm before they can see the truth. Sometimes the nudge that forces them out of the paradigm comes from unexpected sources.
This guy has taken the first step towards leaving his liberal bubble. He should be encouraged to take the next step.
“Leftist are reacting against what they perceive to be moral constraints they believe to be outmoded.....”
_______________________________
Good analogy.
Haven't seen it posted anywhere on the DUmp yet. That's odd. /s
I’m not sure this means much. Frankly anyone that is smart enough to know we are taxed too much and votes is already way ahead of the curve of just about any subject when compared to the general population.
Does anybody know where I could take this scientific literacy test?
Here’s an unbelievably simple 13 question scientific literacy test. I scored 100%. That’s the 93rd percentile for Americans.
http://www.pewresearch.org/quiz/science-knowledge/
I guess his point is proven. As an unregenerate conservative, I’m going to track down a more challenging test of this type and see where I fall.
But are we sure “most scientists” believe that CO2 causes global warming? There seems to me to be too much counterevidence to make a firm statement that it does?
No sh!t, Sherlock.
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.