The left will always accuse you of doing exactly what they themselves are doing.
Sometimes it's how you find out what they are doing...
“And they call conservatives the science deniers.”
“The left will always accuse you of doing exactly what they themselves are doing.
Sometimes it’s how you find out what they are doing...”
Yes! I realized that some time ago, and now use it as a lodestone to lead me unerringly to the truth about their real agenda.
As to the leftist accusation of denying science, that has personally rankled with me for years:
I can practically see (and certainly hear!) people’s estimation of my intellect plummet as soon as I speak a politically incorrect (read: non-collectivist) opinion.
I garnered more science and math awards than anyone in my class in my school days - it does not matter to them. (It is precisely for that reason that I much later, in self defense, sought - and gained - admission to Mensa, Intertel, and the Top One Percent Society, the sort of nerdy distinction that did not interest me in my youth.)
I distinctly recall that leftist “scientists” published articles in magazines like Omni and others in the 70’s and 80’s that scorned the concept of love as a chemical delusion, saying that “evolution” only cared about sex, and the spreading of DNA through the gene pool, and that love was a mere impetus to that end. Now we have some of the leftist “scientists” of today arguing the exact opposite: that it is sex that is the delusion (with one so-called scientist I read calling sex a “gamut” and railing at anyone calling it “binary”), and that what really matters is that two persons - of ambiguous so-called genders (a linguistic term heretofore never properly applied to human beings) - love each other.
It is analogous to the climate issue: “Scientists” of yesteryear prophesied an anthropomorphic ice age; now their counterpart “scientists” of today as shamelessly prophecy an anthropomorphic fire age.
Speaking as one with a science background, both science and scientists are vastly overrated: Science is merely a neutral tool (albeit, like a gun, a powerful one), to be used or abused according to the aptitude and intention of the user. To paraphrase the literary character of Spock, science makes a good servant but a bad master. It is up to the scientist to examine his own biases and motives, in order to not abuse this tool; the tool will not guarantee him protection from his own blind spots; if the scientist assumes that he is protected from error by the method itself, then he invites such error.
Scientists are fallible, prejudiced persons like any other. In reality, studies are typically designed to obtain grant money, and/or to further a political or dogmatic conviction, or merely to further one’s own career; the vaunted peer review scientific hierarchy is as impartial as we now see the Donor/Delegate political class to be (i.e., the fix is usually in, and established by the power elite, acting like a priestly religious order determined to stamp out heresy and cast out heretics). As with anything, follow the money is the best course of action.
I will conclude by quoting myself from my disillusioned scientific days:
“Science requires objectivity, but it does not provide it.”