• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Romney and Obama answer science questions

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,471
423
126
If we didnt have politics or religions in this world, we would be starting wars on Sciences and which theories are right and wrong.
Some how I doubt that.

You never addressed my assertions about the numbers of people in the different parties who are more likely to resist adjusting to new findings by scientists or who are more likely to introduce new curriculum just to oppose (imo) theories that contradict their world view.

That is what prompted my initial statement.

If only there weren't any Republican yahoos who were so disdainful of science that more Republican's could be reasonable when it came to science.
I didn't say "If only Republicans weren't yahoos who were disdainful of science."
 

Screech

Golden Member
Oct 20, 2004
1,202
6
81
Basically this. Your statement blanketed every republican out there.

I took no offense, just don't like it when people are not careful with what they say, as generalizations can cause problems, when one ment a majority or a large portion of a group and not the group as a whole.

However science is a fickle thing. Theorys, even proven true over and over can be found false if new evidence shows up for it. Hence my love for Science.

And yes, same as politics, religions, sciences, whatever. people like to hold onto their views until there is drastically so much evidence to show the opposite of. If we didnt have politics or religions in this world, we would be starting wars on Sciences and which theories are right and wrong.
edit, ugh, south park images from the atheist future episode won't load.
 

davmat787

Diamond Member
Nov 30, 2010
5,514
24
76
It is foolish to say blanket statements like this when it is not true.

I identify myself as a republican. I am also a scientist. I love/respect sciences and love to push forward to new ways of thinking.

I also see a lot of flaws in the republican party that I do not agree with, just as much as I see flaws in the democratic party that I do not agree with.

However the blind for either side will never admit or fully see these flaws for what they are, and thus the debates on here always turn into a carnival of debating even though the truth is inbetween.

hence why they are so entertaining to read. And thus I sometimes try and joke them into derailing, with little success because of I swear their blind hatred for each other.
Well said.

These blanket statements, such as the one that prompted your reply above, have pissed me off for a long time. They only expose the ignorance of the person posting it, rather than illuminating the forum with some new interesting thought. As if the partisan hacks party is without fault and perfect! Glass houses and stones and stuff.

I am talking about statements like "democrats are socialists" and "republicans are racists" that surface daily, probably hourly, here.

If only the hardcore partisan hacks could police "their own kind". That is about the only way I can see the overall quality improving.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,471
423
126
Here you go Blankslate, another climate scientist commenting on Muller.

http://judithcurry.com/2012/08/04/the-irresistable-story-of-richard-muller/

It even includes a section of Muller commenting on Curry. Great stuff.
It is an interesting read from another viewpoint however it does reference a curiously named blog.

I find the story surrounding Richard Muller interesting for several reasons, at the end of the post I will provide my own analysis. Here are some recent articles that I have found to be interesting or insightful.
climatedenial.org
Climate change denial is a blog that explores the topic of climate change denial. The article The irresistable story of Richard Muller provides the title for this post. Some excerpts:
However she's talking mainly about Richard Muller and not his findings. As I've said.


I wonder if he's right? Who knows? Perhaps new data will come out that shows that Climate Change is entirely cyclical and humans have no influence on it.
I don't expect him to suddenly say climategate is a non-issue just because he has come to agree that there is a temperature change happening either.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
It is an interesting read from another viewpoint however it does reference a curiously named blog.

However she's talking mainly about Richard Muller and not his findings.[/B] As I've said.

I don't expect him to suddenly say climategate is a non-issue just because he has come to agree that there is a temperature change happening either.
Dr.Curry was a co-author of the BEST study which still hasn't passed peer review btw.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,471
423
126
Dr.Curry was a co-author of the BEST study which still hasn't passed peer review btw.
But she hasn't signed off on the latest data. I wonder if it's faulty and Dr. Muller is incorrect.

which again is why I've said "Perhaps new data will come out that shows that Climate Change is entirely cyclical and humans have no influence on it."

Yet you seem to ignore that....

And harp only on the climate change controversy and not address my questions about I.D. and who introduces it more in regards to the Theory of Evolution.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
Just resurrecting this thread since Slate (hardly a right wing publication) says that Romney schooled Obama on science.

Romney Out-Debates Obama
How the GOP candidate schooled the president on science policy.
According to Science Debate, both the Obama and Romney campaigns say they are considering participating in a live science forum. In the meantime, these written answers will have to do. If you scroll through them quickly, one thing is immediately apparent: Mitt Romney’s team took this very seriously. His answers are longer, they have subtitles, they have bullet points. It’s not just great presentation: The Romney text is substantive, specific, and detailed. Obama’s answers to some of the same questions are single paragraphs that are vague, repetitive (two in a row start with “Since taking office”), and poorly written.

Question No. 4 is about pandemics: Recent experiments show how avian flu may become transmissible among mammals. In an era of constant and rapid international travel, what steps should the United States take to protect our population from emerging diseases, global pandemics and/or deliberate biological attacks?

This question is an invitation to show strong leadership, expertise, creativity, and a sense of urgency. Obama’s answer starts like this: “We all are aware that the world is becoming smaller every day.”

Romney nailed it. An excerpt of his answer: “To further improve preparedness, we must continue to invest in the best public health monitoring systems that can be built. I will also encourage advancements in research and manufacturing to increase scientific understanding of new pathogens and improve response time when they emerge. The development of new countermeasures, from diagnostics to antibiotics and antivirals to respirators, will help protect human lives in the face of new bugs and superbugs.”
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/09/science_debate_2012_in_an_upset_romney_schools_obama_on_science_policy_.single.html

I'm sure our usual suspects will find the little nuggets that are thrown to them by Slate, but to have this left-wing publication spank Obama is refreshing.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,471
423
126
I'm sure our usual suspects will find the little nuggets that are thrown to them by Slate, but to have this left-wing publication spank Obama is refreshing.
It's too bad that if Romney got elected he would just kowtow to the "people used dinosaurs as beasts of burden" crowd in his party and flip on some of his answers...

http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/10/29/mitt_romney_flip_flops_on_climate_change_global_warming.html

I mean it's not like he hasn't done so before....:p
 
Last edited:

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
It's too bad that if Romney got elected he would just kowtow to the "people used dinosaurs as beasts of burden" crowd in his party and flip on some of his answers...

http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/10/29/mitt_romney_flip_flops_on_climate_change_global_warming.html

I mean it's not like he hasn't done so before....:p
Yeah, as if Obama did shit about it when he had the chance. Now he just runs and hides it's such a loser of a topic. Wait! What was his famous line about “I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children … this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”
lol, he's a liar and an idiot, kind of like the majority of his supporters.
Let's ban plastic bags! That will change the world!
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,471
423
126
lol, he's a liar and an idiot, kind of like the majority of his supporters. Let's ban plastic bags! That will change the world!
Calm down man we don't want you to stroke out...

Yeah you're so sure about the liar part that perhaps you have liar-dar :p
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
Calm down man we don't want you to stroke out...

Yeah you're so sure about the liar part that perhaps you have liar-dar :p
I'm sure that Obama doesn't know shit about science and that Romney blew him out of the water according to Slate.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,471
423
126
I'm sure that Obama doesn't know shit about science and that Romney blew him out of the water according to Slate.
I'm sure that you're happy that Governor Romney had a better staffer writing the answers than President Obama did. But go on ;)
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
I'm sure that you're happy that Governor Romney had a better staffer writing the answers than President Obama did. But go on ;)
You just go on believing that Obama stopped the oceans from rising and started healing the planet. It's OK for tards and small children to trust in magical lies. I'm sure Santa and the Easter Bunny are helping him little one.
 

Darwin333

Lifer
Dec 11, 2006
19,947
2,325
126
I'm sure that you're happy that Governor Romney had a better staffer writing the answers than President Obama did. But go on ;)
Yet historically Republicans have funded science (which in Washington is ALL that matters) more than Democrats. How bout that?
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
17,516
7,936
136
Meh.

I did make me smile to see a member of the GOP accusing someone else of "stifling medical innovation." Funny stuff! Stem cell research anyone?
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
For both of you lefties.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/09/10/are_democrats_really_the_pro-science_party_115367.html

No. As we thoroughly detail in our new book, "Science Left Behind," Democrats are willing to throw science under the bus for any number of pet ideological causes – including anything from genetic modification to vaccines.

Consider California’s Proposition 37, which would require genetically modified food to carry a warning label. The American Medical Association is opposed because “there is no scientific justification for special labeling of bioengineered foods.” Every major scientific and regulatory agency -- including the prestigious National Academy of Sciences, the World Health Organization, EPA, FDA, and USDA -- recognizes the importance of genetic modification.

Yet, the California Democratic Party has officially endorsed Proposition 37 -- in direct opposition to the recommendation of America’s finest doctors and in contradiction to the scientific consensus. The Republicans endorsed the pro-science position. Did this fact make the news? No.

Digging deeper into the issue, one finds that California Democrats have de facto allied themselves with some of the biggest anti-science quacks in America. Among Prop 37’s most fervent supporters are peddlers of alternative medicine, anti-vaccine groups, and even one crank who claims that genetically modified food causes autism.

This anti-science mentality is not a recent development. The Democratic Party has long made common cause with prominent people who thought vaccines caused autism, two in particular who stand out among the rest.

The first person is Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who published an influential article in Rolling Stone and the progressive website Salon back in 2005 tying vaccines to autism. It was so inaccurate that both publications retracted it several years later. But the damage had already been done. Because of widespread misinformation from celebrities like him, to this day, millions of Americans falsely believe that vaccines cause autism.

The second person is President Barack Obama. On the campaign trail in 2008, Obama said , “We’ve seen just a skyrocketing autism rate. Some people are suspicious that it’s connected to the vaccines. This person included. The science right now is inconclusive, but we have to research it.”

Wrong. The science was settled in 2002, if not earlier. In truth, the biomedical community never accepted this link, even as the myth gained wider acceptance among the general public. Obama was either severely uninformed about basic medical science or he was playing politics with people’s fears.

Once he got into office, his performance on the issue didn’t improve. In 2009, under the auspices of his newly elected administration, the FDA ordered a change from multi-dose to single-dose influenza vaccines because they contained less thimerosal -- the preservative that anti-vaccine activists wrongly believed causes autism. According to Scott Gottlieb, a former deputy commissioner of the FDA, this last minute switch was partially to blame for the vaccine shortages which occurred later that year.

Strangely, these anti-science decisions made by prominent Democrats were largely unreported by the news media. Yet, whenever a Republican makes an ignorant, unscientific remark or denies evolution or global warming, that is front-page news -- often for multiple days at a time.

Simultaneously, Democratic journalists, such as Chris Matthews, have the audacity to run news analysis segments asking why Republicans are anti-science -- while blatantly ignoring all of the anti-science shenanigans going on inside their own party. Perhaps it is time Mr. Matthews takes off his blue-tinted sunglasses.

We call for an end to the media’s double standard for science reporting.

Indeed, the only reason Democrats are considered the “pro-science” party is because the media, for whatever reason, has decided to give them a free pass on scientific issues. It is time the free pass be revoked.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,471
423
126
Last edited:

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
Good job finding a rightie site....

fucking stupid, get a real link

For instance here's the budgets for the N.I.H. which is basically the national health research agency and they have gotten increases in funding regardless of who's been in control of government.

http://www.nih.gov/about/almanac/appropriations/part2.htm

Thanks for playing though.
You asked for proof, it was provided. Now you want to cry and throw a tantrum because you got your ass handed to you.

Typical liberal Democrat.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,017
571
126
There aren't many members of the Democratic Party compared with members of the Republican party who think that Intelligent Design should be taught in schools as if it had been tested and checked as much as the Theory of Evolution has.
To the extent that ID is presented as an alternative to Evolution, I disagree with its existence. To the extent that evolution is taught with the implicit assumption that there is no God, I have a major problem. No scientific theory makes (or should make) any proclamation about realms rightly left to philosophy, such as God and the meaning of our lives.

Christians or at the very least theists should have no issue with evolution. It's the answer to how, not why.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY