How do Liberals Flunk Science? Let Us Count the Ways.

With most of the U.S. recently in the grip of significant cold, and given the proper goading from President Trump, liberals again felt led to lecture us on the difference between weather and climate. Of course, it’s lost on most leftists how they so often fail to apply the same standards to themselves. Whether blizzards, hurricanes, wild fires, tornadoes, record heat, record cold, and so on, with religious-like devotion, liberals almost never fail to link dramatic weather events to their apocalyptic climate narrative.

One of the easiest jobs in the world has to be that of climate doomsayer. No matter the weather, the climate kooks can scream “man-made global warming!” and the faithful will follow with a hearty, “AMEN!” In spite of the folly and the pseudo science behind the man-made global warming movement, time and again the modern left insists that it is conservatives—especially Christian conservatives—who have abandoned science and reason.

Last year, The New York Times went as far as to blame evangelicals for our “post-truth society.” The New York Times lamenting a “post-truth society” is like Satan complaining about sin. In other words, few organizations or individuals in the history of humanity have waged a more enthusiastic war on the truth than has “the newspaper of record.”

A more comprehensive list would note that liberals are against the science of oilfield fracking.

Liberals are also against the science of genetically enhancing crops/food (e.g. GM seeds).

Liberals oppose using 3D printers because they can make firearms, especially the new metal 3D printers (shhhh, don’t tell them about CNC!).

Liberals oppose using CRISPR to edit human DNA (faster, stronger, smarter humans).

Liberals oppose scientific forestry... the process of clearing underbrush and proactively cutting new roads as firebreaks (often via logging) that reduces forest fires in more conservative woodland states such as Alabama. Anyone see the California wildfires recently?!

Liberals oppose hydroelectric dams (’cause “Salmon!”).

Liberals oppose using aqueducts to save freshwater in Oregon from being dumped by large rivers wastefully in the Pacific saltwater ocean, whereas conservatives want to use that water to help solve California’s fresh water shortage.

I disagree with the fundamental premise of this article. You simply can't flunk science if you don't first TAKE it. I've found that vast majority of those adhering to the belief that conservatives don't believe in science have never actually taken any science courses that they had an option to avoid.

I loved science. I became an engineer, and the most used book on my bookshelf is my Halliday Resnick freshman physics book. In high school, I would go home and perform science experiments in the basement doing the things I learned in class, using nothing more than ordinary household chemicals. I disassociated hydrogen from oxygen by placing battery terminals in water. I learned how to increase current flow by salting the water. I learned how expensive this was based on the cost of batteries. I learned how to use a doorbell transformer to reduce my cost, etc.

Growing up in northern Minnesota, I also learned about climate. In one experiment, I filled a clear glass jug with chlorine gas. It had a nice green tint. Since chlorine gas liquefies at -39 degrees, I waited for a -40 degree night to observe the transition change. Alas, it was March by then, and we had no more -40 degree mornings. But, that taught me a lot about climate. I know the months when the coldest temperatures happen. I know, for sure, that we had a good number of -40 degree days those years. I can also see now that some of those -40 degree days are happening again.

The purpose of all this is not to recall my youth. It's to point out that science is a rigorous process. It requires hypotheses , theory, experiments, and, yes, skepticism. There is no consensus in real science. All scientists should be skeptics. Anyone who talks of a 'scientific consensus' should be immediately dismissed as irrelevant. He didn't FLUNK science, he never TOOK it.

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.