Slashdot Mirror
Santorum Calls Democrats 'Anti-Science'
ndogg writes with news that Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum has counterattacked those critical of conservative views on science, saying that they're 'anti-science' themselves. From a CBS report:
"In his remarks Monday, Santorum went beyond his usual discussion of the importance of increasing domestic energy production to deliver a blistering attack on environmental activists. He said global warming claims are based on 'phony studies,' and that climate change science is little more than 'political science.' His views are not 'anti-science' as Democrats claim, Santorum said. 'When it comes to the management of the Earth, they are the anti-science ones. We are the ones who stand for science, and technology, and using the resources we have to be able to make sure that we have a quality of life in this country and (that we) maintain a good and stable environment,' he said to applause, and cited local ordinances to reduce coal dust pollution in Pittsburgh during the heyday of coal mining."
I've known many republicans in my time, having lived in conservative states, and just about all of them believed in evolution AND creationism (that's correct, they're not mutually exclusive, bible says why and evolution says how).
No, the Bible most clearly says why *and* how. It says God spontaneously created all of the animals and Adam, and then created Eve from Adam's rib - this all about 10000 years ago. *That* is creationism, and a terrifying 40% of the US population still believes that story. Yes, that is "strict creationism", and yes, it really is 40%. Before you think about debating that fact, go look up the statistics yourself.
True evolutionary theory starts with the idea that all life evolved over billions of years, starting with simple inorganic compounds that combined into some of the basic organic building blocks (amino acids, nucleotides, etc).
These theories are so far from compatible with each other a 4 year old can instinctively comprehend the contradiction. Unfortunately, society then spends the next 10 years teaching the child the obvious conclusion is wrong...
That was Bush's first term.
His second term was due to a corrupt electoral system in Ohio.
Incidentally, in Florida in 2000, butterfly ballots and chads were merely a diversion. The election was really stolen when some 30,000-50,000 African Americans were misclassified as felons and denied the right to vote.
Both political parties are willing to throw science under the bus when it suits their agendas.
That's all good and fine, but - if we accept it as true - all it proves is that the Republicans have more of their beliefs in conflict with science than Democrats. If you don't believe me, then sit down and add up the number of issues where Republicans are against the science, and then add up the same thing for Democrats. I recently heard a discussion where they were attempting to figure out the level of bias on the Left and Right and they needed an issue where Democrats are largely in conflict with the science. The best candidates for the left are anti-nuclear power (which is actually a left-wing in the 1960s, I doubt it has much traction now) and some of the organic food, anti-genetically modified food, and anti-vaccine movements. All of them look pretty small, though. I bet you'd have a hard time arguing that these are issues where a majority of the Left agree with any of them. On the other hand, creationism and anti-global warming are majority opinions among Republicans.
http://www.environmentmagazine.org/Archives/Back%20Issues/September-October%202008/dunlap-full.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/27847/majority-republicans-doubt-theory-evolution.aspx
Democrats don't deny the Laffer curve, we deny the claim by Republicans that we're on the right side of the curve. I would actually say that Republicans don't seem to believe in the Laffer curve - it seems more like they believe in a straight line where tax revenue increases whenever you lower taxes, no matter where you're currently at. Why do I say that? Because Republicans are constantly complaining about wanting to lower taxes, but by historical standards, the US currently has one of the lowest tax rates of the past 80 years.
FWIW, I'm a Christian who believes in both creation and evolution.
FWIW, that is also roughly the position of the Catholic Church and has been for decades.
Santorum is a catholic but seems to be very much in the intelligent design camp.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Who cares what the bible has to say?
Roughly 2 billion people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_religious_groups#Largest_religions_or_belief_systems_by_number_of_adherents
I mean the scientific method when I say "science".
And when people embrace views not backed by evidence they are not being scientific, and science CAN say that your belief has no evidence backing it up. Furthermore, science then says you should give this belief with no evidence a very low probability of being true. The scientific method can be applied to any question that has real world effects.
I am not conflating science with epistemology. While many subjects in philosophy, including epistemology, are important, they are an interesting side show compared to the many real world result that we get from science every day.
Anarchists never rule
Except that there is more evidence to suggest that the Christianity's deity is the invention of human beings than that such a deity exists in the real world. The characterization of the Christian deity is dependent on the age of the particular story characterizing that deity, with the new testament painting a very different picture from the old testament, and with elements of the Jesus story being apparent in the mythology of those cultures that Jews had contact with in the early days of Christianity. Not quite enough evidence to say exactly what happened or to build a well-developed theory, but more than has ever been collected to suggest that such a deity actually exists (which is, "none at all").
Anyone with two semesters of study in ancient Greek culture (language, literature, mythology, etc.) can plainly see that Christianity is just another Hellenistic mystery cult. With lots of Greek mythology grafted on.
Virgin birth? Miracles? Witty destruction of you're opponents' positions? Raising the dead? Executed by the state for "impiety", yet embracing that murder? Harrowing Hell? Taken up into heaven?
You can't make this stuff up... because it was all made up centuries before Christianity ever got started.
And continued to be made up: We know of a Roman citizen who was prosecuted for raising the dead.
Except for the supernatural bits, Jesus is just Socrates promoted to godhood.
A tiny amount of education can dispel a huge amount of superstition.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade