National Geographic goes all in on Tea Baggers

[DMX7]

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/02/26...-with-magazine

[Wild Cobra]

The article leads of with fluoride, then the flat earth. It speaks of how these new realizations are counterintuative to the understanding of the times.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/20...achenbach-text

This article speaks of the likes of Mouse and Cosmoron:



It has nothing to do with Tea Party members. You are making things up. Your thread le is a lie. But then, we all know you are a low-life de able person.

Do Tea Party aligned individuals, in general, think fluoridation is bad? Isn't that the liberals?

Do Tea Party aligned individuals, in general, think the earth is flat?

Do Tea Party aligned individuals, in general, think GMO are bad? Isn't that the liberals?


Do Tea Party aligned individuals, in general, believe climate change is a hoax? I think not. They just don't perceive it as a problem. A quote from the article:

But industry PR, however misleading, isn’t enough to explain why only 40 percent of Americans, according to the most recent poll from the Pew Research Center, accept that human activity is the dominant cause of global warming.

It doesn't say there are disbelievers of AGW, it says they don't believe AGW is the dominant cause.

I would say your ability to be a tool for the left is amazing. You start this thread that primarily addresses liberal shortcomings, and spin it as conservative shortcomings.

Why don't you liberal lemmings who parrot slanderous leftist sites have a brain? You know, evolution developed most of ours. Did you miss that step in your lineage?

The bulk of the article is about climate skeptics. The ending paragrah actually shows skeptics to be correct about science:

Now we have incredibly rapid change, and it’s scary sometimes. It’s not all progress. Our science has made us the dominant organisms, with all due respect to ants and blue-green algae, and we’re changing the whole planet. Of course we’re right to ask questions about some of the things science and technology allow us to do. “Everybody should be questioning,” says McNutt. “That’s a hallmark of a scientist. But then they should use the scientific method, or trust people using the scientific method, to decide which way they fall on those questions.” We need to get a lot better at finding answers, because it’s certain the questions won’t be getting any simpler.

[boutons_deux]

Pretty gutsy. How many subscribers will they lose?

[Wild Cobra]

Pretty gutsy. How many subscribers will they lose?

I suspect only the nutjobs like yourself.

I read the article. Did you?

[DMX7]

I suspect only the nutjobs like yourself.

I read the article. Did you?

The article was written in a deliberately non-partisan manner, but the cover page (which I specifically referenced) reminds you quite boldly who it is that's really engaged in the war on science...

Sadly though, you have the reading comprehension of a third grader, so naturally you missed the entire point of the article. It does not "shows skeptics to be correct about science". There couldn't possibly be a more wrong conclusion to draw from this article than that. Inquiry through means of the SCIENTIFIC METHOD is fundamental to science. That's what the author means when he writes "everybody should be questioning". Questioning and criticizing the consensus reached BY THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD (i.e., a thoughtful, precise and rigorous process of hypothesizing, testing, analyzing and forming conclusions) itself without any real basis for such ridiculous questions or claims is what the war on science is all about.

[Wild Cobra]

It does not "shows skeptics to be correct about science".

You ignore the fact that science is all about being skeptical. Not consensus.

[DMX7]

You ignore the fact that science is all about being skeptical. Not consensus.

NOT SKEPTICAL OF SCIENCE, DUMB .

[Aztecfan03]

http://www.torontosun.com/2015/02/26...-with-magazine

How many of those are common tea party beliefs?

[Aztecfan03]

The article was written in a deliberately non-partisan manner, but the cover page (which I specifically referenced) reminds you quite boldly who it is that's really engaged in the war on science...

Sadly though, you have the reading comprehension of a third grader, so naturally you missed the entire point of the article. It does not "shows skeptics to be correct about science". There couldn't possibly be a more wrong conclusion to draw from this article than that. Inquiry through means of the SCIENTIFIC METHOD is fundamental to science. That's what the author means when he writes "everybody should be questioning". Questioning and criticizing the consensus reached BY THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD (i.e., a thoughtful, precise and rigorous process of hypothesizing, testing, analyzing and forming conclusions) itself without any real basis for such ridiculous questions or claims is what the war on science is all about.

Most of the things on the cover aren't even close to conservative positions.

[DMX7]

How many of those are common tea party beliefs?

What political group in America is filled with more people that don't believe in climate change or evolution and also thinks vaccinations can lead to autism?

[boutons_deux]

Most of the things on the cover aren't even close to conservative positions.

The really BIG one is. Conservatives, s to BigCarbon/BigCorp, deny man causes global warming, deny the global warming exists, and if it does, it's no problem.

[DMX7]

The really BIG one is. Conservatives, s to BigCarbon/BigCorp, deny man causes global warming, deny the global warming exists, and if it does, it's no problem.

And let's ask the republican primary candidates at the far right Iowa caucuses how many of them are proud evolution believers!

[Wild Cobra]

How many of those are common tea party beliefs?

I don't think any of them are.

[Wild Cobra]

The really BIG one is. Conservatives, s to BigCarbon/BigCorp, deny man causes global warming, deny the global warming exists, and if it does, it's no problem.

Who denies that global warming exists?

Link please.

[Wild Cobra]

And let's ask the republican primary candidates at the far right Iowa caucuses how many of them are proud evolution believers!

Is a refusal to answer questions normal, or abnormal? Politicians "punt" all the time.

[DMX7]

Who denies that global warming exists?

Link please.

How about the link you just read?

Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, one of the most powerful Republican voices on environmental matters, has long declared global warming a hoax.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/20...achenbach-text

[Wild Cobra]

How about the link you just read?
Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, one of the most powerful Republican voices on environmental matters, has long declared global warming a hoax.

Really?

I'll bet the journalist is not correctly quoting him.

How about the original link?

The best quote I know of is:

"With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the phony science, could it be that man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people?"

I see it as the idea that AGW is primary, not that it doesn't exist. Maybe I'm wrong, but I haven't see evidence.

Does saying "man made" include natural global warming?

How does a twisted mind spin that to mean all warming is a hoax?

Also, using the qualifying words "could it be," poses it as a pointed question, rather than stating it as fact.

Now unless you have a better quote...

[Wild Cobra]

Again, he doesn't say global warming isn't real...

As I said on the Senate floor on July 28, 2003, “much of the debate over global warming is predicated on fear, rather than science.” I called the threat of catastrophic global warming the “greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people,” a statement that, to put it mildly, was not viewed kindly by environmental extremists and their elitist organizations.

When your side has to lie to make a point, you have no credibility.

then you are too stupid as to why people don't listen to your side!

[tlongII]

I would say that believing vaccinations lead to autism is more of a liberal belief.
I would say that believing the moon landings were faked is more of a liberal belief.
I would say that believing GMO food is bad for you is more of a liberal belief.

[DMX7]

Again, he doesn't say global warming isn't real...



When your side has to lie to make a point, you have no credibility.

then you are too stupid as to why people don't listen to your side!

The guy literally wrote a book en led The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future.

[TeyshaBlue]

What political group in America is filled with more people that don't believe in climate change or evolution and also thinks vaccinations can lead to autism?

You're about 50/50 there.

[Wild Cobra]

The guy literally wrote a book en led The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future.

Yes, I know. Did you read it?

Care to show me a photo of the offending text?

How does it compare to this piece of fiction:

[z0sa]

Misleading thread le, tbh.

[SupremeGuy]

Misleading thread le, tbh.

Yup.

I love threads like this, tbh. They always start off with the op making up bull to get views/responses, then it quickly turns into the op getting his pushed in by multiple people, then the op trying desperately to save face by deflecting/spinning as much as he can, and finally ends with the op getting butthurt and leaving the thread with his tail between his legs.

[SupremeGuy]

I would say that believing vaccinations lead to autism is more of a liberal belief.
I would say that believing the moon landings were faked is more of a liberal belief.
I would say that believing GMO food is bad for you is more of a liberal belief.

But but tea party