The Left’s War on Science, by John Stossel

HT/Joel O

0 0 votes
Article Rating
95 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Irritable Bill
July 6, 2019 10:38 pm

The only leftists I know are either borderline retarded, or sheeple who just get their “facts” from their favorite TV channel. Or liars with an agenda.
When I pointed out to a friend of mine that his news was constantly lying to him, something I was easily able to do, and asked him why he continued to watch it, he said he liked it because it was fun.
There was a push a while back by the Loony Left to begin calling us “Fact-ers.” Because they needed a name to call us in response to our knowing facts…when they didn’t. A simple faith is best, you don’t want any beastly facts cluttering up “the science.”

commieBob
Reply to  Irritable Bill
July 7, 2019 12:14 am

It is popular to think of the left as liberal and the right as conservative. That doesn’t necessarily hold. In the USSR, a conservative would have been a staunch Marxist and a liberal would have been a capitalist. Even then, there are so many definitions of the word ‘liberal’ that the term is almost useless.

The term ‘liberal’ that I grew up with defined someone who loved freedom. Maybe that’s why the libertarians started calling themselves that and abandoned the term ‘liberal’.

Psychologists have started defining liberals as having trait openness and lacking trait conscientiousness with conservatives being the opposite. link So, liberals like change and conservatives don’t. Conservatives get useful things done and liberals, not so much.

There’s no evidence of IQ difference between liberals and conservatives. People on both sides should give up calling the other side stupid. Both personality types are necessary for society to continue to function and to adapt to changing circumstances. We better get back to civil conversations. The fault there lies mostly with the liberals.

The poster boy for facts is Thomas Sowell. link He started out on the left but, as he says, facts got in the way. It’s very sad that he isn’t better known. For decades he has pointed out the bad policies foisted on us by the liberals and the damage those policies have done. The facts are on his side. Sadly, he has been mostly ignored.

They would deny it, but the left is remarkably closed minded. Someone I love dearly turns red in the face and starts sputtering at the mere mention of Jordan Peterson. It’s amusing but sad.

Stephen Richards
Reply to  commieBob
July 7, 2019 1:26 am

Thomas Sowell has not been ignored, I believe. I think he has been refused the public forums that would have made him better known.

ATheoK
Reply to  Stephen Richards
July 7, 2019 8:15 am

I think Thomas Sowell has rejected the constraints those forums want him to operate within.

Thomas Sowell insists upon those pesky facts, again; and not the political beliefs and current elites fashionable notions.

2hotel9
Reply to  ATheoK
July 7, 2019 4:53 pm

Mr Sowell has also rejected the cut&paste “editing” so rampant in “journalism” today. When he speaks to a “journalist” he expects them to report what he said precisely as he said it, nothing removed, nothing rearranged, nothing altered in anyway whatsoever. “Journalists” refuse to do that, so he speaks and writes in venues which American citizens can access exactly what he is saying without interference from “journalists”, and that really pisses the political left off no end.

nw sage
Reply to  ATheoK
July 8, 2019 6:19 pm

It is indeed unfortunate that Sowell insists on being discussed on what he SAID, not what they said he said. Journalists have a very difficult time with that concept because it restricts their ability to ‘shape’ the news.

Throgmorton
Reply to  commieBob
July 7, 2019 2:21 am

You are correct that Libertarians had to coin a new name for themselves when ‘Liberal’ became a synonym for ‘Leftist’ back in the ’60s, when the Leftists adopted the strategy of promoting sexual license as a substitute for personal liberty.

Conservatives are far more open and tolerant than liberals. As Thomas Sowell observed, a conservative might regard a point of view with which he disagrees as being foolish without despising the person who holds it, but a Leftist will regard the person with whom he disagrees as evil and a legitimate target for destruction.

Leftists take great pride in holding openness as a distinguishing virtue, but as Thomas Sowell points out, it is a very narrow, selective kind of openness. They champion certain demographics as ‘mascots’ of their own sense of moral superiority, to use Dr. Sowell’s terminology, while excoriating other groups as ‘targets’.

Dr Deanster
Reply to  Throgmorton
July 7, 2019 5:50 am

Indeed ….. the definition of tolerate is to allow the existence of or practice of something one does not necessarily agree with. The left redefines tolerance as accepting what one already agrees with, but that someone else may not.

You did not see conservatives disrupting society over Obummers terms. … nothing but peaceful protest … until the left counter protesters show up and disrupt things.

Even the most despicable groups on the right are in reality more tolerant than the left, as their positions remain purely in the philosophical with no action outside of their own little bubble. …. ie, they allow their opponent to exists, even though they disagree.

2hotel9
Reply to  commieBob
July 7, 2019 7:37 am

“both sides should give up calling the other side stupid” When they stop saying and doing stupid crap I will, till then they will be tagged with the correct nomenclature. Simply put? Free your mind and your a$$ will surely follow.

beng135
Reply to  2hotel9
July 7, 2019 8:31 am

That’s a big problem w/the lefties’-created & abused meme “tolerance”. It has taken hold after decades & stopped the calling-out of blatant stupidity which in the past would’ve been immediately called out & derided.

MarkW
Reply to  commieBob
July 7, 2019 8:39 am

I think it is more on the lines of, conservatives aren’t into change for changes sake.
Conservatives are quite willing to embrace change, you just have to show them up front that the change will be better than what they already have.

Randy
Reply to  commieBob
July 7, 2019 4:14 pm

Thomas Sowell was ignorant when he was on the left. When he realized that the facts did not support the ideology of the left, he moved to the right. If he had ignored the facts and stayed on the left, he would have been stupid. Those on the left who ignore the facts really are stupid or are self serving.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Randy
July 8, 2019 3:56 pm

Many on the left are willfully ignorant, because that takes less effort than thinking for themselves. For the most part, they do what “feels right”, not what they think is right. Listen to the way they talk – “I feel” this, or “I feel” that. Again, feelings are easier to develop than rational thought.

edward w bergonzi
Reply to  Irritable Bill
July 7, 2019 6:25 am

In which case, you are only familiar with what I would characterize as the pseudo-left … the feminist, racial politics, #Metoo, “green”, identity politics types. Your definition of “left” needs to be more precise and historically-grounded.

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  edward w bergonzi
July 7, 2019 12:01 pm

In the U.S., there are no other liberal “types”.

Andy Pattullo
Reply to  Irritable Bill
July 7, 2019 7:12 am

I have had this experience discussing global warming with an intelligent, well educated friend who believes the alarmists. I was basically told it wasn’t fair for us to debate this because I knew too much about the science.

Simon
Reply to  Irritable Bill
July 7, 2019 11:12 am

“The only leftists I know are either borderline retarded,”
What a great opening statement for the comments section trying to assert the right is more open minded. Seriously? Here’s the thing… extremists on both sides are anti science. It has nothing to do with left or right. If you are extremely conservative you are probably closed to any thought that the left could be correct and vice versa.

2hotel9
Reply to  Simon
July 7, 2019 3:42 pm

When “people” are borderline retarded you have to tell them they are borderline retarded, otherwise they become Al Gore, Joe Biden,Horizontal Harris and Accusatory Occasional-Cortex. And lets us not forget Robbie Mueller, Jimmie Comey and Barri Obama. Or Nanny Pelosi, Andrew Cuomo, Tommie Wolfe and Little Petey Buttplug. Robert Francis O’Rourke was told he is borderline retarded, he responded by screaming&stamping his effeminate little feet and then jumping on tables until his teachers and parents simply stopped paying attention to his mentally retarded antics, so he toddled off to Austin where his routine made him King Of The Retards, or KOTR, since the other mental retards in Austin are incapable of actually writing out a coherent sentence.

No, don’t thank me! Clearly you needed reality poured over your head like a bucket of pig shyte. Oh, and whilst we are here, humans are not causing climate to change, humans can not stop climate from changing. You are welcome, snowflake.

Keith Sketchley
Reply to  2hotel9
July 7, 2019 4:22 pm

You left out the kitty-grabbing, reality TV star from your list of borderline retards.

2hotel9
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
July 7, 2019 4:34 pm

I missed you? Sorry! I’ll bang your a$$ next time around, mental midget.

Kenji
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
July 8, 2019 2:36 pm

Just to be clear and accurate … MY (reality star) President never said he grabbed women’s kitty-parts … rather … he was describing how he COULD … because so many women are willing to whore themselves up to people with power or money. MY President was simply describing the trashy values of trashy women.

But I NEVER expect leftist nitwits to get anything right, or factual. Meh.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
July 8, 2019 3:38 pm

Kenji, your president loves to fornicate with trashy women, case in point Sephanie Clifford.
You have to consider her “trashy” due to the fact that she (aka Stormy Daniels) is
a porn actress. Not only does your president love doing trashy women, he does them
just after his wife gave birth to their son.
.
Lastly he pays her to keep her mouth shut.
.
Your president is TRASHY as birds of a feather……..
.
.
PS, your president called Jeffrey Epstein a “terrific guy.” That also makes your president trashy.

Keith Sketchley
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
July 8, 2019 3:40 pm

2hotel9, nice to see you are able to post your sexual preferences on this blog.

Paul Penrose
Reply to  Keith Sketchley
July 8, 2019 4:01 pm

Kenji,
But I’m sure that sketchy Keith never said anything untoward about anybody in an unguarded moment in his entire life, or rather he never got caught by someone who was not supposed to be recording him. That’s the risk of being famous, and Trump is not the only one that has been caught by the open mic.

2hotel9
Reply to  Paul Penrose
July 9, 2019 5:49 am

One word, Joe”Gaffe Machine” Biden!

LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks
Reply to  2hotel9
July 7, 2019 9:10 pm

LOL! I like your style, 2H9. It’s like Usenet all over again.

Together, you and I could roll into the libtard camp, build our base entirely from exploded snowflake skulls glued together by snowflake flopsweat and drool, and be cracking cool brewskies by noon as we recline in our skull-built thrones. Those poor bastards would never know what hit them.

Now, some may say our takeover of the libtard camp would be an unfair fight somewhat akin to a heavyweight boxer raining hammerblow punches on the face of a hare-lipped hydrocephalic toddler… but they’d be wrong… the tards keep ramming their faces into our metaphorical Fists O’ Reality. Big difference.

It’s time to stop mollycoddling these snowflakes. A good dose of reality jackhammered through their thick skulls and a swift kick in the coalchute is what they all need. Then they need a dose of their own doxing / employer-harassing / doorstep-protesting medicine… as I always say: “Weak, broke and running scared should be the natural state of all socialists.”.

Yeah, I have a bit of a problem with people infected with The Stoopid. And socialist snowflakes are terminally Stoopid.

Simon
Reply to  LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks
July 7, 2019 11:38 pm

LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks
I have this image of a skinny guy talking big in front of his computer. A man scared of his own shadow but sooo tough behind a keyboard.

Simon
Reply to  LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks
July 8, 2019 12:14 pm

“I took down a criminal organization tied to the Russian mafia by hacking their computers, outing and doxing all their employees, and forwarding all the details of their criminal operation to the FBI. I tracked down and hounded their head guy (the picture of him you see on SpamHaus.com I got from his personal server, along with rather embarrassing photos of him enjoying tranny massages in Thailand), got him run out of three countries (US, Britain, Canada), got a $37.5 million court order against him in the US, and got him arrested and thrown in the clink in Ukraine for renting little girls from orphanages then starring in CP films with them…”
OK so you beat me…. that’s tough…. What are you doing wasting your time writing on here? Get out there and sell that movie story.

Steve Reddish
Reply to  Simon
July 7, 2019 6:24 pm

Conservatives see themselves as tolerant of others despite a difference of opinion, and recognize that liberals are not tolerant of those holding a different opinion from liberals.

Liberals see conservatives as being just as intolerant as they know themselves to be.

Simon, thank you for demonstrating this:

“If you are extremely conservative you are probably closed to any thought that the left could be correct and vice versa.”

Simon
Reply to  Steve Reddish
July 7, 2019 11:44 pm

“Conservatives see themselves as tolerant of others despite a difference of opinion, and recognize that liberals are not tolerant of those holding a different opinion from liberals.”

Really/ Read LOL@Klimate Katastrophe Kooks’s and 2hotel9 ‘s tolerant comments above and tell me how understanding conservatives can be of others…..

Robert B
Reply to  Irritable Bill
July 7, 2019 2:51 pm

Fact-ers. Kind of explains why the leftwing media all of a sudden loved talking about evidence based research. What did they think research was before that?

The Voice of Truth
Reply to  Irritable Bill
July 8, 2019 3:10 am

This was not appropriate MOD

Dan McCormick
Reply to  Irritable Bill
July 11, 2019 5:32 pm

Anthropogenic Climate Change is a tool of the globalists to seek, destroy who disagrees, manipulate, silence, disarm, and corrupt the population. Easier for them to control you!

Alan
July 6, 2019 11:17 pm

Carl Sagan, not exactly a right winger, encouraged vigorous debate. He warned about what is happening now. He’s bound to be spinning in his grave over what the left has done to science.

beng135
Reply to  Alan
July 7, 2019 8:35 am

Sagan identified problems caused by the left, but couldn’t bring himself to acknowledge he was part of one of the worst offenders — his own academic colleagues.

edward w bergonzi
Reply to  beng135
July 7, 2019 9:17 am

Sagan was known to have smuggled the works of Leon Trotsky into the Soviet Union.

Reply to  edward w bergonzi
July 8, 2019 9:47 am

Sagan was known to have smuggled the works of Leon Trotsky into the Soviet Union.

That’s as socially useful as smuggling in the works of Ernst Roehm into Nazi Germany.

Richard Patton
Reply to  Alan
July 7, 2019 4:28 pm

Vigorous debate can be fun. I had a co-worker who was on the opposite side of the fence than me in many things (I’m since retired) We had lots of fun debating each other. It was always a civil and friendly discussion.

Bob boder
Reply to  Richard Patton
July 8, 2019 7:20 am

Would not happen today, you would be an “ist” of some sort or another.

The Voice of Truth
Reply to  Alan
July 8, 2019 3:11 am

Says the due, ho denies climate science , yet doesn’t quote any science to support his claims

Martin Weiss
July 6, 2019 11:23 pm

this video is over a year old so the references are somewhat stale

Joel O'Bryan
Reply to  Martin Weiss
July 7, 2019 12:17 am

It may be a year old, but is truer than ever in 2019 in light of the AOC/Markey illiterates and their GND. And look at all the science illiterate Democratic presidential candidates who reflexively endorsed the GND without a clue what it means. And then we have Creepy Uncle Joe Biden declaring he will bring us back to Paris (becasue it was Obama’s legacy I guess), when every honest climate scientist now realizes the Paris Agreement INDCs were meaningless… the day the agreement was signed.

So ,the Left is chock full of junk science as Mr Tieirney highlights over and over. The anti-science is clearly on the Left. Overwhelmingly.
Creationism and Intelligent Design are relegated to the parochial schools and bible classes. They do not affect how science is done. And never will.

A perfect example is Naomi Oreskes, the Harvard academic who likes to bash climate skeptics, yet is an anti-Vaxxer and anti-GMO activist. She picks and chooses her science, yet still gets published bashing climate skeptics because see the junk pseudo-science that pervades climate science and climate models today.

Steve Case
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
July 7, 2019 1:35 am

GND = Green New Deal

yirgach
Reply to  Steve Case
July 7, 2019 11:19 am

GND = Green Nude Eel

FIFY

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  yirgach
July 7, 2019 12:06 pm

GND >> GNS = Green New Steal

FIFY much better.

R Shearer
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
July 7, 2019 6:54 am

The left’s war on vaccines is having negative effects. Diseases which were non-existent are beginning to reappear, some due to unchecked illegal immigration.

Joel O'Bryan
July 6, 2019 11:57 pm

Go!!! GO!! Go!! USA Soccer Sunday (morning) vs. Netherlands .
Woot!! Woot!! Go women!!
Great game at hand Sunday morning (US time)!!

Also…
Big H/T to Ken Haapala for carrying this John Stossel anti-science video essay as an IBD article in his 15 April 2018 TWTW.
Thanks Ken.

Alan the Brit
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
July 7, 2019 2:42 am

I shall be cheering for the USA this afternoon (UK) , our girls did very well but no cigar, I hope USA break a record today by winning……………again!!! 😉

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  Alan the Brit
July 7, 2019 12:08 pm

Very gallant of you Alan, thank you.

DonM
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
July 7, 2019 10:07 pm

look, there’s one out there on the field holding her ankle …
wait, no one paid any attention … she’s up and running again … tough girl.

there’s another one … they aren’t stopping to see how she’s doing either … she’s staying down for a while longer (she’s in the box) … she’s up and running again.

I have so much respect for how they can soldier through the pain and keep playing….

Wait there’s one down … she’s being ignored too … the announcers are very dismayed (“WHY DON’T THEY STOP … SHE HAS HER HAD RAISED”) … they finally see her … damn ref, lett’n her lay there with a blood on her face … why can’t the refs pay prompt attention to those injuries.

tobyglyn
July 7, 2019 12:49 am

That was great, thanks Charles!

Dodgy Geezer
July 7, 2019 2:45 am

The left do not have a ‘War on Science’.

They have abandoned logic in favour of exaggerated and hypocritical argument. You will see this in science, in economics, in culture, everywhere they are arguing.

They do not proceed to try to determine the truth from shared basic positions. Instead, they have a conclusion that they wish to reach, and are prepared to say anything which will justify that conclusion. Hence, an argument for altering raw temperature data is ‘that is what the models show is happening’, and an argument against someone who points this out is ‘You are sexist’.

July 7, 2019 3:53 am

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/11/30/claim-trump-denies-climate-change-because-he-hates-wind-turbines/#comment-1915946\

The following post is from The Global Warming Policy Foundation in London, December 1, 2016.

More green energy nonsense, and the gradual awakening of the Europeans to the folly of wind and solar power. This is how all popular delusions end – first the true believers start to question the obvious folly of their ways, ever so slowly, and with extreme difficulty.

This is because global warming hysteria is NOT a scientific reality – it is a false religious belief cherished by fanatics who have no scientific competence. I say this because their predictive track record is perfectly negative – every one of their scary predictions has failed to materialize.

There is NO scientific evidence that the sensitivity of climate to increasing atmospheric CO2 will cause dangerous global warming. Some theoretical physics analyses suggest increasing CO2 may cause some warming, but that warming will probably be insignificant, This is unfortunate, because a somewhat warmer would be a better world, for both humanity AND the environment.

The only clear consequence of increased atmospheric CO2 is that plant growth has been enhanced and the planet has greened significantly. This is clearly beneficial to humanity and the environment.

Regrettably, I think Earth is about to get colder due to natural causes, and humanity and the environment both suffer in a colder world. The greater threat is that in a few thousand years (at most) we will re-enter a real Ice Age, and the most prosperous parts of our planet, virtually all Western Europe, Russia, Canada and the northern USA will be covered by continental glaciers a mile thick, just as they were about 10,000 years ago – and this Ice Age will last about 100,000 years. This will be the fourth such Ice Age cycle in the last ~400,000 years

It may be that we can prevent this Ice Age disaster by controlling the albedo of the advancing ice sheet, but maybe we cannot. This is the real threat of (natural) climate change, and the global warming fanatics could not have gotten it more wrong.

It is apparent that, in the main, we are governed by scoundrels and imbeciles.

Regards, Allan

icisil
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
July 7, 2019 4:52 am

“The greater threat is that in a few thousand years (at most) we will re-enter a real Ice Age”

Valentina Zharkova thinks earth will begin to enter that phase about 2600, which will end a period of significant warming above what we have now, that follows a super grand solar minimum in 2020-2055. The interesting thing about her work (for me) is that her model apparently accurately “predicts” past solar minima/maxima.

Frederick Michael
Reply to  icisil
July 7, 2019 12:45 pm

I’ve been watching our incoming “grand solar minimum” like a hawk here:

http://www.spaceweather.com/

The key numbers (all posted on the left side) are: Sunspots, Thermosphere Climate Index, and Radio Sun.

So far, this minimum isn’t shaping up to be as deep as the last one. Leif said this would happen.

Of course, everything could change, but it’s getting late.

Richard M
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
July 7, 2019 6:27 am

I think we can prevent the formation of the ice sheet. The key is Hudson Bay. We keep it from freezing and you have no North American ice sheet and the planet stays warm enough to prevent the formation of any other ice sheets.

We install hundreds of geothermal heating devices under the water. The goal is not to warm the water but to keep it from cooling. Keeping the water at the current temperature would be sufficient. Might take a thousand devices but at least the energy to drive them is available from the source of the energy they would use to add heat to the water. They could be robotic, self sufficient units that would be completely hidden at the bottom of the water.

The cost should not fall on Canada alone even though the Canadians would have the most to gain. An international effort but completely under control of the Canadians.

Drake
Reply to  Richard M
July 7, 2019 8:16 am

Build Nuke power plants and use the bay for steam condensing/cooling. Would replace the soon to be lost hydro due to rivers freezing, etc. that Canada depends on. Run the power lines south to supply Canadian and US cities. Win/Win!

Philo
Reply to  Richard M
July 7, 2019 9:15 am

An Glaciation is on the way, barring some planetary catastrophe. The earth is already near the lowest temperature it can go compared to previous glaciations. The only question is how long. It could be from a few hundred years to a few thousand, Previous glaciations(only12 or so examples) were between 10 and 20 thousand years long. We’ve already passed 14,000 years.

A few small nukes in the bottom of Hudson’s bay would stir things up nicely for a long time with little practical effect outside the bay. Just try to pick a time when the fish, bears, and seals are not in the middle of things.

John Robertson
Reply to  Richard M
July 7, 2019 8:21 pm

Or we could try the solution offered in “Fallen Angels” a mirror in synchronous orbit reflecting microwaves onto the Bay.
I always liked that imagery,coupled with the work of a Quebec Engineer who calculated the effect of damming Hudson Bay and returning the fresh water South where it would do us some good.
An interesting side effect is a brackish Hudson Bay would apparently be more productive.

Richard Patton
Reply to  John Robertson
July 7, 2019 8:28 pm

I need to re-read that book. It was the first book that I read pointing out the stupidity of the greens.

JON R SALMI
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
July 7, 2019 9:50 am

Allan, it is my fear that there will be a Great Awakening by scientists and politicians to the warmth and fertilizing benefits of CO2, just in time to see the Earth slide into another Little Ice Age. If it turns out to be the next glacial period that we are entering, civilization will be pretty much be toast.

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
July 7, 2019 7:14 pm

Corrections to my above post:
The correct url for my above comment is this:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/11/30/claim-trump-denies-climate-change-because-he-hates-wind-turbines/#comment-1916085

Also, the text is mine; the text from the GWPF was excerpted.

Re imminent global cooling:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/02/19/new-noaa-forecast-suggests-current-el-nino-will-fade-fast-and-be-replaced-by-a-strong-cooling-la-nina-this-year/comment-page-1/#comment-2149581

In response to your request, Seaice1 – my 2002 article predicting global cooling is reproduced here:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/10/polar-sea-ice-changes-are-having-a-net-cooling-effect-on-the-climate/#comment-63579
[excerpt]
“If [as we believe] solar activity is the main driver of surface temperature rather than CO2, we should begin the next cooling period by 2020 to 2030.”

More predictions of global cooling by others are recorded at:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/10/polar-sea-ice-changes-are-having-a-net-cooling-effect-on-the-climate/#comment-63317

Sara
July 7, 2019 5:07 am

If you look at merely the last 600,000 years of warming and cooling periods, including (in the USA) the Wisconsin glacial maximum, the COLD periods are consistently longer than the WARM periods. Try spreading out the graph chart to just that, showing only the length of time, never mind the temperatures, and it becomes obvious to even the least science-oriented person that warming periods are shorter than cold periods. There may be many side factors involved in how it occurs, but WARM is consistently shorter than COLD.

That’s all I need to know.

July 7, 2019 5:09 am

The USA Liberal as described sounds very close to the left wing of the
Australian Labour Party. That Party tends to ignore them with their Nutty
Ideas.

Our “”Liberal Party” is Conservative, and close to the US Republican Party
but a kinder version of it.

MJE VK5ELL

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Michael
July 7, 2019 12:54 pm

What’s “unkind” about the US Republican Party?

Richard Patton
Reply to  Tom Abbott
July 7, 2019 4:37 pm

Give him a break. He has probably has only seen ABC’s (Australian Broadcasting Company) depiction of the Republican Party. ABC (Australia) is on the same page as ABC (US), NBC, CBS, CNN, and MSNBC, which think that the Republican party is the party of the Devil.

Hashbang
Reply to  Richard Patton
July 8, 2019 1:37 am

Don’t forget the BBC.. In any case I’m pretty sure Michael is well aware of the extreme left bias of the ABC and would get his real information elsewhere. I read the ABC news site from time to time for the purpose of “know your enemy” but as often as not leave it feeling disgusted that a large percentage of the general population read such socially destructive nonsense without question. To rub salt into the wound I’m helping to fund this monstrosity by way of my taxes.

VK4…

Richard Patton
Reply to  Hashbang
July 8, 2019 10:55 am

I don’t know about Australia, but here in the US BBC-America, which is carried on some cable networks, is further down on the viewer rankings than Muppet re-runs.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Richard Patton
July 8, 2019 3:59 am

“Give him a break. He has probably has only seen ABC’s (Australian Broadcasting Company) depiction of the Republican Party.”

Yes, I think the Leftwing Media is where a lot of people get their bad opinion about the Republican Party. Unfortunately.

Duane
July 7, 2019 5:14 am

All ideologues, left, right, religious, whatever, are anti-science and anti-fact.

It goes without saying that “believing in something” makes you turn off your brain.

There are facts and logic, and then there are “beliefs” – at opposite ends of the intellectual scale.

Anna Keppa
Reply to  Duane
July 7, 2019 8:30 am

Does believing in science and the scientific method “turn off your brain”?

Does believing in human freedom and being against tyranny “turn off your brain”?

Asking for a friend…

Richard Patton
Reply to  Anna Keppa
July 7, 2019 4:38 pm

+10 couldn’t have said it better.

Mark - Helsinki
July 7, 2019 5:33 am

AOC tried and failed to start off an idea that facts are bad and that we should go with feelings.

of course, that woman is the dumbest person to ever enter politics, and that is some achievement

icisil
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
July 7, 2019 6:39 am

Possibly, but I’m not sure about AOC being the dumbest. The Democrat party has some real winners, e.g., the black guy who thinks some Pacific island will tip over, the black woman who wears the glitter cowboy hats and thinks people who make fun of Congresspersons should be prosecuted, Maxine Waters (the geriatric AOC), among others. The left elects some real nutcases.

Reply to  icisil
July 7, 2019 7:38 am

As a Canadian, I resent those allegations.

Justin Trudeau is “way dumber than all those American politicians and Climate Barbie is a close second.
https://youtu.be/qZUyIxrJ1ac

We the North. 🙂

R Shearer
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
July 7, 2019 1:23 pm

Do they know what a garbage disposal is and how to operate it?

Mike b
Reply to  icisil
July 7, 2019 10:55 pm

Hank Johnson, brother in law of Hank Aaron, baseball slugger said Guam would tip over. Man, how much more money can we throw at that portion of society to have them get dumber amd run more companies? AOC should start a bartending school and call it “fools take me serious and tip me.”

John Bell
July 7, 2019 6:31 am

Leftists are masters of projection, and are in deep denial about it.

Daniel Martin
July 7, 2019 7:14 am

Leftist “science” begins with an emotional conclusion (such as there are no inherent differences between males and females) and reverse-engineers data to confirm it. This resembles religion more than science.

Steve Oregon
July 7, 2019 7:34 am

The global warming issue has exposed the deliberate ignorance of the left.
Their chronic ignoring and/or rejection of opposing data and arguments leaves them right where they want to and need to be. Dumb, committed and deceitful.
Merely suggest, on any news comment board, that people visit WUWT and note the assailing rejection by lefties. They parrot a verbatim retort that mocks and advises WUWT is unworthy and a no go zone.
Of course every location or source that challenges their mind is rejected as well.

2hotel9
July 7, 2019 7:41 am

I shared this on FB when it first came out, FB blocked it as inappropriate. Very open minded of them, eh?!?

HD Hoese
July 7, 2019 7:49 am

“The consequences of global warming and climate change are effectively uncontrollable at least in the near term. On the other hand, the consequences of eutrophication-induced hypoxia can be reversed if long-term, broad-scale, and persistent efforts to reduce substantial nutrient loads are developed and implemented. In the face of globally expanding hypoxia, there is a need for water and resource managers to act now to reduce nutrient loads to maintain, at least, the current status.” from : Rabalais, N. N., et al. 2010. Dynamics and distribution of natural and human-caused hypoxia, Biogeosciences, 7, 585-619. https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-7-585-2010, 2010. https://www.biogeosciences.net/7/585/2010/

“Scientists” from multiple fields have been in the “”ACT NOW” mode, among other foibles. Promoters of this have been going after nutrients for decades and were essentially forced to admit that, as some of us knew, it was a long known process of stratification, magnitude dependent in a very complex way on nutrients. The “Dead Zone” is not dead as I got in trouble saying back in the dirty 90s. Real science on it steadily coming out. I like this one. Craig, J. K., P. C.Gillikin, M. A. Magelnicki , and L. N. May. 2010. Habitat use of cownose rays (Rhinoptera bonasus) in a highly productive, hypoxic continental shelf ecosystem. Fisheries Oceanography. 19(4):301-317.

If it has calories something will eat it.

james lyon
July 7, 2019 8:21 am

According to the scientists, the Earth and life has existed over a range of 0.02-0.07% CO2. CO2 is a TRACE chemical in the atmosphere, and is not evenly spread over the Earth.
If one wants to use weather as an example of climate, which it isn’t, then I would just point out that summers were a lot hotter in the fifties in the SF Bay Area than they are now and the weather in AZ was much worse a few decades ago.
All these things (global warming, ozone holes, illegal migrants, eliminating petroleum, etc.), all have one reason: to control the population— through taxes and benefits, regulations, travel control, job creation and control, and getting votes for the “right” parties.
1984 is approaching rapidly.

R Shearer
Reply to  james lyon
July 7, 2019 1:25 pm

More like 0.02-0.1% on a dry basis.

R Shearer
Reply to  james lyon
July 7, 2019 1:27 pm

Sorry, 0.02-0.8%

Robert of Texas
July 7, 2019 10:37 am

I got news for the universities out there…

I have NEVER personally met a sociologist who understood the first thing about science and how it is performed. They do not understand what it is, how to design a test, how to conduct a test, how to interpret the data, or what reproducibility even means. They TALK impressively using big words, but they do not get that there is such a thing as a fact in the real world that goes beyond their opinion. They should be labeled “Biasologists”.

So when I see a study from a group of sociologists, I usually just file it under “biased group think opinion” and move on.

Reply to  Robert of Texas
July 7, 2019 2:33 pm

I was interested in “doing a sociological study” of a group I know who are rather unique. So, I went to a local University and spent a good half hour looking through the bookshelf to find a book on the methodology of social surveys. There wasn’t a single book.

Instead, it was like reading a series of people’s diaries about their holiday trip to some exotic location (to spend days upon days talking to people explaining what they wanted them to say and occasionally shutting up when they finally got the answer they were looking for).

In short – training to be a “reporter” (aka Fake News writer)

William Astley
July 7, 2019 12:26 pm

It is larger and more dangerous, than anti-science. It is the spreading of angry chaos.

The Left universities and the fake news, are clueless and angrily passionate about ideas that cannot be defended by facts and honest analysis which explains why they have turned off critical non-partisan discussions.

For example:

The new organization thirty years ago helped stop chaos.

Thirty years ago, news reporters were careful to speak respectively about the president’s position, and to include facts that supported the president’s position.

Reporters and news agencies thirty years ago try to help the process of solving problems. There was often a Democrat and a Republican on a news segment, who were working together to come-up with an effective bill to address the issue, and so on. Interesting and productive discussions for the country.

Reporters and news organizations, thirty years ago helped the country, understand issues, and change for the better.

The Dictionary
Reply to  William Astley
July 8, 2019 3:15 am

Trump lied 11’000 times (since he was appointed against the will of the people), as verified by various independent new papers. Even Fox News called his lies several times.

Attacking science is a Conservative Hallmark.

Grow a pair of balls.

Kerry Eubanks
Reply to  The Dictionary
July 8, 2019 8:39 am

You’re a very funny person. It’s kinda sad that you actually consider yourself to be serious.

“The Dictionary?” Magnificent parody. OH, you’re serious about that too?

Richard Patton
Reply to  The Dictionary
July 8, 2019 10:59 am

Oh, and saying that your sex is determined by how you feel is science? I suppose that you believe unicorns are real too.

2hotel9
Reply to  The Dictionary
July 9, 2019 5:53 am

Why don’t you just list those lies for us? Should be easy!

Hugs
July 7, 2019 11:42 pm

Missed this one. Thanks charles for sharing. Extra points for subtitles; no need to turn volume up and try to figure out spoken English.

Fact Matters
July 8, 2019 3:13 am

SO, Trump doesn’t believe science … so he is a leftists sissy then?

Jaakko Kateenkorva
July 8, 2019 4:46 am

Based on 2020 Democratic Party presidential debates the battlefront has moved on beyond science a long time ago.

%d bloggers like this: