76 Nobel Laureates in Science Endorse Obama!
- Thread starter jackschmittusa
- Start date
kage69
Lifer
- Jul 17, 2003
- 27,285
- 36,409
- 136
I was waiting for something like this to happen. We have a candidate who is one of the most intelligent and pragmatic runners of all time, trying to win the White House after 8 years of close-minded conservatives taking their war on science to new lows.
Apart from the bullsh!t pseudo-science peddlers down in the bible belt, I wouldn't expect anyone even remotely near the scientific field to endorse McCain and the fundie nut psycho he chose as veep.
Go Obama!
Apart from the bullsh!t pseudo-science peddlers down in the bible belt, I wouldn't expect anyone even remotely near the scientific field to endorse McCain and the fundie nut psycho he chose as veep.
Go Obama!
Born2bwire
Diamond Member
- Oct 28, 2005
- 9,840
- 6
- 71
No, it's not something to consider, much like endorsements from hollywood celebrities or evangelist preachers mean nothing. Their opinions are worth something when it comes to their field of study. Outside of that area, it means nothing.
PokerGuy
They represent many fields of study. They are generally considered to be some of the brightest people on the planet. That they collectively agree on a subject they have all considered should have some weight.
They represent many fields of study. They are generally considered to be some of the brightest people on the planet. That they collectively agree on a subject they have all considered should have some weight.
riiight. so the opinions of 76 nobel laureates, whose combined expertise covers nearly every academic discipline, should be discounted? i take from your comment that you think that unless someone is an expert in *everything*, his political opinion should be ignored? riiight.
You hate them for their intelligence? May as well get a cave next to bin Laden. After all, he endorsed your candidate.
I like how liberals feign intellectualism and charity, all the while eschewing fundamentals of both.
not to take away from their intelligence, but I wouldn't trust a bunch of chemists and medics with choosing the leader of the free world. all I really read in their endorsement is "Obama's going to give us the most money."
I was wondering if someone would come in here and try to diminish the value of such an endorsement, and it looks like P&N never disappoints.
To suggest that Hollywood opinion somehow equates to a collective opinion of Nobel Laureates says all I think most people need to know.
conservative rejection of "elitism" is demonstrable. it's practically part of the republican platform. i wonder how you've arrived at your conclusion that liberals feign intellectualism and charity. have you seen studies that show that most college (and beyond) educated people are conservative? do liberals donate to charitable organizations less than their conservative counterparts? for some reason i doubt it, but i'd love to see some empirical evidence to the contrary.
Look at it this way instead of your hollywood example.
These people are leaders in their field. They want more money for R&D, grants, and other scientific ventures. The fact that so many of them endorse one option says that they believe that person will help them advance their respective fields.
Nations that have great scientific minds, and is a leader in the scientific arena usually are some of the most successful nations. So their endorsement for Obama can infer that they believe he will help fund scientific reasearch.
...and that is something that all of us should want. No one here likes shitty special interest funding that does little to nothing to help out the majority of this country. However, we all love it when money is spent that really does help advance us and this is a special interest group that can really do a lot to make that happen. They are a special interest group that is "for the people" so to speak. Why some of you are rejecting this idea goes way beyond my understanding especially when considering the number of other shitty special interest groups out there that don't do jack for us.
Think of it this way. If they were endorsing McCain would you guys still have a problem with it and find it irrelevant or can you only see it as an opportunity to go up?
They're not just any 'bunch of chemists and medics'...
Even if that was their motive, I wouldn't mind more money being spend on the sciences. More discoveries and advancements would be a good thing.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter