Trust In Science Has Declined Among Conservatives

I would think it would be the other way around where scientists would not trust conservatives.

There way of thinking with science just does not go.

Personally with the way conservatism went in the 1990s I got the impression that conservatives were trying to do away with science.

Plus I think new ideas are hard for conservatives or do I have the conservative title wrong?

This is like trying to fit a round hole into a square peg.

There=their. Sorry for the typo.

Why would conservatives trust science? When it has been corrupted by fools like algore, michael mann, james hansen, etc. A bunch of charlatans who produce false science in the name of government control. Add to that list people haters like Paul Ehrlich, Obama's science advisor John Holdren, and numerous others, it's no surprise that conservatives would reject faux science as preached by that kind. Now real science still remains in favor among conservatives. Not the kind of idiocy that is so loved among the Statist elements.

Anonymous wrote:

I would think it would be the other way around where scientists would not trust conservatives.
There way of thinking with science just does not go.
Personally with the way conservatism went in the 1990s I got the impression that conservatives were trying to do away with science.
Plus I think new ideas are hard for conservatives or do I have the conservative title wrong?
This is like trying to fit a round hole into a square peg.

But the stats show conservatives fund science a lot more than liberals - you can't claim to love science and cut funding and you can't be anti-science and pass and sign laws increasing its funding.

HTS wrote:

Why would conservatives trust science? When it has been corrupted by fools like algore, michael mann, james hansen, etc. A bunch of charlatans who produce false science in the name of government control. Add to that list people haters like Paul Ehrlich, Obama's science advisor John Holdren, and numerous others, it's no surprise that conservatives would reject faux science as preached by that kind. Now real science still remains in favor among conservatives. Not the kind of idiocy that is so loved among the Statist elements.

If we use this logic we wouldn't be able to trust almost anything or anyone. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater...not that I agree with you on all of them. Conservatives sure seem to want to trust in plenty of other corrupted ideals, organizations, entities, etc to be complaining about science. People don't trust when it's beneficial for them not to and they do trust when it is beneficial for them to. Democrats operate the same way most of the time. It's high time for everyone to think for themselves for a change...rather than following some "cult" party line.

The fact is science has a system of checks and balances. It's all open for refutation or for ANYONE to provide a better explanation than those whom you say you do not trust.

I always hear about these greedy scientists who want grant money as if most of these scientists get rich off them or something. You do know that big business WORLDWIDE would make any team of scientists who could disprove AGW...instant multi millionaires. If they felt so sure about AGW not being true...you could bet there would be big business grants and prizes out there all over the place.

Surely you aren't going to imply that big business and/or conservatives would rather COMPLAIN about it than to do the work or provide the incentive to scientists to put it to bed once and for all. Nah...let's point to the exception and pretend it's the rule so we can continue with our agenda. If we do the work we might find out we are wrong.

Modern conservatives are usually religious and religion hates science.

The_Box wrote:

Modern conservatives are usually religious and religion hates science.

Ummm, 45% of scientists in America are religious and a lot more worldwide. Do they hate themselves? Do they also hate irony?

Cash wrote:

<quoted text>
Ummm, 45% of scientists in America are religious and a lot more worldwide. Do they hate themselves? Do they also hate irony?

No, they're just inconsistent thinkers.

They're like black Mormons.

The_Box wrote:

<quoted text>
No, they're just inconsistent thinkers.
They're like black Mormons.

Uhhh, you don't know any scientists.

Cash wrote:

<quoted text>
Uhhh, you don't know any scientists.

Scientists should be skeptical by nature and accept claims based on evidence.

Religion is the opposite of skepticism: it is the acceptance of claims with no evidence, or in spite of evidence.

If one is a scientist and also religious, they are inconsistent.

The_Box wrote:

<quoted text>
No, they're just inconsistent thinkers.
They're like black Mormons.

You better not say that in front of a black Mormon.:-/

The_Box wrote:

Modern conservatives are usually religious and religion hates science.

Do you consider Mr. Obama a modern conservative? He calls himself "progressive".

nanoanomaly wrote:

<quoted text>You better not say that in front of a black Mormon.:-/

Why not?

nanoanomaly wrote:

<quoted text>Do you consider Mr. Obama a modern conservative? He calls himself "progressive".

Obama is fairly centrist.

I think most folks have witnessed "agenda driven" science all to often not be skeptical these day.

The_Box wrote:

<quoted text>
Why not?

Because they might kick your behind.

The_Box wrote:

<quoted text>
Obama is fairly centrist.

And Jim Jones was the result of a virgin birth.

nanoanomaly wrote:

<quoted text>Because they might kick your behind.

I thought Mormons were supposed to be friendly and non-violent.

nanoanomaly wrote:

<quoted text>And Jim Jones was the result of a virgin birth.

What major liberal or progressive moves has Obama made?

He has the same foreign policy, tax policy, and civil liberties record as GW Bush. His health care reform was based on Republican ideas from the 90s.

The_Box wrote:

<quoted text>
What major liberal or progressive moves has Obama made?
He has the same foreign policy, tax policy, and civil liberties record as GW Bush. His health care reform was based on Republican ideas from the 90s.

This is the first time I've ever heard of a president directing NASA to reach out to a group based on their religious belief alone. Funny, but I didn't notice him including Buddhists in his outreach program.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Progressive? No, but definitely skewed.