The left's rejection of science

[Slade3200]

What are some examples of right wing scientific institutions?

Exactly. Only fascists/communists/etc. engage in propaganda. The right doesn't do that - thus there are no "right-wing science institutes". There are only credible science institutes and left-wing faux "science" institutes which engage in propaganda.

Ok, so give me a few credible institutes.

That last statement of yours was hilarious by the way. Give it a read and really think about what you just said.

 

[Billo_Really]

Are you aware that you just did the Logical Fallacy of Begging the Question, twice?

Or are you too stupid.

Spin it any way you want, but the fact is, your "small government" mantra doesn't hold up when you consider those two issues you want government to waste its time on.

 

[Seawytch]

What are some examples of right wing acedemic institutions?

Academic institutions which are known to reject the progressive ideology in favor of a sane, rational, and intellectual experience include Liberty University, Hillsdale College, Grove City College, and BYU.

BYU is okay? You sure?

BYU scientists take lawmakers to task on climate change issues

 

[PK1]

The left's rejection of science ????? Ha ha

LOL!
Liberals embrace science more than cons. More than 5x as many libs become scientists than cons do.

 

[P@triot]

The left's rejection of science ????? Ha ha

LOL!
Liberals embrace science more than cons. More than 5x as many libs become scientists than cons do.

View attachment 125483

You might want to read this thread in its entirety before commenting chief.

 

[P@triot]

What are some examples of right wing acedemic institutions?

Academic institutions which are known to reject the progressive ideology in favor of a sane, rational, and intellectual experience include Liberty University, Hillsdale College, Grove City College, and BYU.

BYU is okay? You sure?

BYU scientists take lawmakers to task on climate change issues

Slade and I were discussing fracking my dear. Do try and keep up...

 

[Seawytch]

What are some examples of right wing acedemic institutions?

Academic institutions which are known to reject the progressive ideology in favor of a sane, rational, and intellectual experience include Liberty University, Hillsdale College, Grove City College, and BYU.

BYU is okay? You sure?

BYU scientists take lawmakers to task on climate change issues

Slade and I were discussing fracking my dear. Do try and keep up...

Okay...http://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1218&context=byuplr

(It discusses the water pollution associated with fracking)

But you cited BYU as credible. Does that mean you believe what they say about climate change?

 

[PK1]

The left's rejection of science ????? Ha ha

LOL!
Liberals embrace science more than cons. More than 5x as many libs become scientists than cons do.

View attachment 125483

You might want to read this thread in its entirety before commenting chief.

No need to. I made my point.
This thread is BS.
There are science idiots on both sides of the political spectrum, and you can cherry pick your targets, but in general, the science profession belongs to "liberal" thought, not "conservative" thinking that is prevalent in US corporate business.

 

[P@triot]

Liberals embrace science more than cons.

You might want to read this thread in its entirety before commenting chief.

No need to.

Perfect example. A left-wing nitwit who feels there is "no need" to educate himself before commenting. We can now add "data denier" to his résumé.

 

[P@triot]

But you cited BYU as credible. Does that mean you believe what they say about climate change?

Well I'm certainly not going to throw out decades of indisputable data based on a single article which doesn't even discuss the science, but rather, discusses a letter they wrote.

However, to answer your question, their position carries more weight with me than all of the left-wing political activists paid for by George Soros who are posing as "scientists".

 

[PK1]

Liberals embrace science more than cons.

You might want to read this thread in its entirety before commenting chief.

No need to.

Perfect example. A left-wing nitwit who feels there is "no need" to educate himself before commenting. We can now add "data denier" to his résumé.

If you have such a stupid generalized thread title, then BS is not of interest to pursue.
Do you like to eat shit?

As an example of your stupid wide-brush strokes, i don't consider myself "left-wing"; i am an ethical libertarian.
.

 

[P@triot]

If you have such a stupid generalized thread title, then BS is not of interest to pursue.

It's not "generalized", snowflake. It's backed up with volumes of fact which you are to lazy to read. Which is fine (you have a right to choose to live your life willfully ignorant) except for the fact that you feel the need to comment.

i don't consider myself "left-wing"; i am an ethical libertarian.

I could give a shit what you "consider" yourself. I consider you an asshole. Anyone who comments on a thread without reading the previous posts and links is an asshole. It's almost as though you love the sound of your own voice.

 

[LaDexter]

Liberals embrace science

Parroting is not science.

Fudging is not science.

Fraud is not science.

Liberals lie, steal, hate, and discriminate. There is nothing "scientific" about liberals in the US today.

 

[Seawytch]

But you cited BYU as credible. Does that mean you believe what they say about climate change?

Well I'm certainly not going to throw out decades of indisputable data based on a single article which doesn't even discuss the science, but rather, discusses a letter they wrote.

However, to answer your question, their position carries more weight with me than all of the left-wing political activists paid for by George Soros who are posing as "scientists".

What is the official stance of BYU regarding climate change, puppy? You cited them as reputable, remember.

 

[PK1]

If you have such a stupid generalized thread title, then BS is not of interest to pursue.

It's not "generalized", snowflake. It's backed up with volumes of fact which you are to lazy to read. Which is fine (you have a right to choose to live your life willfully ignorant) except for the fact that you feel the need to comment.

i don't consider myself "left-wing"; i am an ethical libertarian.

I could give a shit what you "consider" yourself. I consider you an asshole. Anyone who comments on a thread without reading the previous posts and links is an asshole. It's almost as though you love the sound of your own voice.

With such a stupid thread title, no one deserves to suffer eating further BS.
If you want people to start reading your crap, at least use a title that is somewhat compelling.
.

 

[PK1]

Liberals embrace science

Parroting is not science.
Fudging is not science.
Fraud is not science.
Liberals lie, steal, hate, and discriminate. There is nothing "scientific" about liberals in the US today.

Apparently, you know little about science. You generalize using groupthink names and don't even realize how stupid you look; not something a good scientist would do, and most of them are liberal.
.

 

[LaDexter]

Apparently, you know little about science. You generalize using groupthink names and don't even realize how stupid you look; not something a good scientist would do, and most of them are liberal.

Then, Mr. Left wing science expert, answer the questions below

1. Why does one Earth polar circle, the Antarctic, have 9 times the ice of the other?

2. During the past million years, Greenland froze while North America thawed, all at the same time with the same amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, so what did CO2 have to do with either event?


Start the Jeopardy! music


PARROTING is not SCIENCE

 

[PK1]

Apparently, you know little about science. You generalize using groupthink names and don't even realize how stupid you look; not something a good scientist would do, and most of them are liberal.

Then, Mr. Left wing science expert, answer the questions below

1. Why does one Earth polar circle, the Antarctic, have 9 times the ice of the other?
2. During the past million years, Greenland froze while North America thawed, all at the same time with the same amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, so what did CO2 have to do with either event?

PARROTING is not SCIENCE

So, why are you PARROTING? To prove you are not a scientist ... nor a rational thinker?
I am not a climate scientist, so if you want to learn more about that field, go to their sources and stop PARROTING con groupthink.

 

[LaDexter]

Asking you a question your sub human science invalid left wing liar rear end is too chicken to answer is "parroting?"

Hardly.

Parroting is mindlessly repeating. That is what you do. That is what all sub humans who parrot Algore's BS do.

Your sub human brain can only parrot, which is why you won't attempt to answer the questions above, since there isn't anyone you can PARROT for "your" answer....

The FRAUD CENSORS my questions for good reason - to answer them is to disprove CO2 based climate change.

 

[PK1]

Parroting is mindlessly repeating. That is what you do. ...

OMG, i rest my case with your mindless dribble.
If you want to understand the scientific arguments on AGW, then read the material from the relative experts ... the 90% of climate scientists in the world community who believe AGW is likely real vs the 5% who don't.

I am not an expert in that field, and you are not either, and you are surely no expert in any rational field.
Geez!
.