Educated conservatives don't believe in science

[Ausm]

Conservatives don't even believe in evolution.

I always thought Conservatives were big on Conserving brain cells.

 

[monovillage]

Actual Study

another one.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.....ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1871503

 

[Jaskalas]

We don't trust the Leftists in government funded academia.

 

[woolfe9999]

Before looking at the link, I'd be willing to bet 5 bucks that by "science" the article actually means "global warming".

Someone tell me if I'm right.

Yes and no. The article discusses a poll that asks the broad question, "how much trust do you place in the scientific community: 1) a great deal, 2)... etc." It is a tracking survey since the 1970's that shows conservatives increasingly saying no the trusting it. The article then explains that this is probably due to the perception that science is used to justify government regulation, i.e. global warming. However, the question is posited in general, not as particular to one issue.

- wolf

 

[GoPackGo]

I don't trust that scientists don't have an agenda.

Their biggest concern seems to be where the next grant check is coming from.

Truth be told Global Warming / Climate Change could be an economic boom for the 1st World...but hose the 3rd world.

 

[Moonbeam]

"The facts have a liberal bias."

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

I don't understand how the news can have a political bias. Opinion pieces are where opinions go. News is where facts go.

 

[woolfe9999]

I don't trust that scientists don't have an agenda.

Their biggest concern seems to be where the next grant check is coming from.

Truth be told Global Warming / Climate Change could be an economic boom for the 1st World...but hose the 3rd world.

If it's only global warming that is alleged to be the problem with science, then it sure looks like conservatives are picking and choosing what they will and will not accept based on whether it supports *their* political view. Which means it is the conservative skeptics who are letting politics control their view, not the other way around.

If OTOH it is all of science that is the problem, then I have to think we should expect scientific progress to come to a grinding halt because science achieves nothing without discovering truths about the natural world and if its agenda is thoroughly corrupted by politics and money then we should definitely expect very few useful results from it any more.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Conservatives don't even believe in evolution.

Well they themselves are pretty compelling evidence against it.

This study really just proves too many morons are able to graduate from college. And the worst kind of moron is a college educated moron.

 

[First]

We don't trust the Leftists in government funded academia.

Then your main issue is that you're not particularly well informed.

 

[monovillage]

"The facts have a liberal bias."

Facts have no bias, they're just facts. Liberals are people and people are biased though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

 

[Infohawk]

I don't share most of the concerns that conservatives have about the scientific community (they seem bogus), but lately there have been calls for reform in some areas like the publishing and incentive to fake data. Maybe there's a way to address legitimate issues and maybe assuage some conservatives at the same time.

 

[Jhhnn]

We don't trust the Leftists in government funded academia.

Leftist! Leftist! Leftist! Label & dismiss, a la the great Rushbo. Which leads us to the inevitable questions- Left of whom or what? How far left?

We need to realize, after all, that egalitarian democracy is a Leftist concept, particularly within a Constitutional framework.

Moonbeam is right- facts have a Liberal bias. When Righties encounter facts contrary to their beliefs, they reject the facts, cling to belief. Part of the way that's accomplished is to attack the source of facts, science, particularly social science of any kind.

 

[monovillage]

Let's not pretend that their isn't some bias in funding sources or that it can be egregious in academic funding. Peer reviewed papers make note of it.
http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/funding-agency-bias-a-short-example/

 

[DominionSeraph]

The study backs up what I posted. People don't trust how politicized science has become. Agreed.

The conclusion, "Science is politicized," brought to you courtesy of Fox News and Conservative Talk... :hmm:

 

[Sunburn74]

I always thought Conservatives were big on Conserving brain cells.

They do so by not using them.

 

[RocksteadyDotNet]

Educated conservative is an oxymoron.

 

[glenn1]

since science is a fact-based/evidence-based field of study, it does not require 'belief'.

Why then is "consensus" in the scientific community one of the main arguments always cited to support man-made climate change theories? You could have 100% of scientists agreeing on the theory and it still be wrong; their "belief" has no bearing on the truth value of the theory whatsoever.

 

[Jhhnn]

Let's not pretend that their isn't some bias in funding sources or that it can be egregious in academic funding. Peer reviewed papers make note of it.
http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/funding-agency-bias-a-short-example/

Of course, but differences in funding are largely pointed out as obfuscation. It's not like we should fund ontological research claiming that the planet is only 6,000 years old & that people coexisted with dinosaurs, or pretend that any drug study funded by the DEA isn't a magnet for grant whores...

The author makes some valid points, unlike climate change deniers, who fund a fair amount of their own "research". Studies about atmospheric CO2 have led us to look deeper, as well, into ocean acidification & the effects of increased oceanic CO2 on algae growth, for example. It's an unfolding story.

 

[Throckmorton]

Why then is "consensus" in the scientific community one of the main arguments always cited to support man-made climate change theories? You could have 100% of scientists agreeing on the theory and it still be wrong; their "belief" has no bearing on the truth value of the theory whatsoever.

Yes, consensus is irrelevant. Evolution is real because it's real. Global warming is real because it's real.

 

[exdeath]

<- conservative minus belief in fairies and hating people different from me.

(which is related to believing in fairies who tell you not to like those people, so it's one and the same really)

I despise religion as much as I despise socialism.

Sanctity of life, liberty, and property are the only absolutes. The rest is just made up BS.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

<- conservative minus belief in fairies and hating people different from me.

(which is related to believing in fairies who tell you not to like those people, so it's one and the same really)

I despise religion as much as I despise socialism.

Sanctity of life, liberty, and property are the only absolutes. The rest is just made up BS.

So you hate religion as much as you hate the religion of the state.

Got it.

Why you so hate-filled?

 

[Jhhnn]

Why then is "consensus" in the scientific community one of the main arguments always cited to support man-made climate change theories? You could have 100% of scientists agreeing on the theory and it still be wrong; their "belief" has no bearing on the truth value of the theory whatsoever.

You postulate absurdity. Rivalries & egos among scientists are enormous, so nothing is ever 100%. The best among them seek out & attack any weakness in other's methodology on that basis, and on the basis of principle, as well. In that sense, science is religion. They believe in scientific method.

This isn't like the general consensus among right wing pundits that trickledown economics actually work as described...

 

[dank69]

The study backs up what I posted. People don't trust how politicized science has become. Agreed.

According to the study:

These analyses suggest

that the confidence measure used in this
study is a reasonable approximation of a​

favorable disposition toward science.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Educated ATOTers don't trust Dave's thread's titles