The left denies science/biology or man can't influence climate change

???


  • Total voters
    9

Der Eisbär

Banned
Banned
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
14,033
Reaction score
1
It's been an ongoing meme from the right that liberals deny science "because there's only two genders". At the same time many on the right, especially the alt-right, deny that man-made climate change is happening. These two beliefs are antithetical to one another. Either you accept the scientific method and accept data and evidence, or you don't. So for that reason you are given one choice in this poll. You can claim that the far-left campus marxists are science denialists by saying there's more than two genders, OR you can claim that man-made climate change is a myth. You don't get both.

two-buttons-and-stuff.jpg
 
Last edited:
I get your point, but...

Dump.

We already know that American conservatives are hypocritical and immune to their own irony.
 
"The leftist libtards are denying science can you believe how stupid they are? There are only two genders!!"

Meanwhile

>GMOs ARE UNSAFE
>VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM
>CLIMATE CHANGE IS A HOAX
 
why can't I vote for both? ban
 
"The leftist libtards are denying science can you believe how stupid they are? There are only two genders!!"

Meanwhile

>GMOs ARE UNSAFE
>VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM
>CLIMATE CHANGE IS A HOAX

You can add: Regressive tax changes pay for themselves.
 
"The leftist libtards are denying science can you believe how stupid they are? There are only two genders!!"

Meanwhile

>GMOs ARE UNSAFE
>VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM
>CLIMATE CHANGE IS A HOAX

Aren't GMOs being unsafe a liberal belief? I certainly hear it more from liberals than I do from conservatives.
 
I don't really understand this thread. Could you flesh this out a bit?
It's become a meme from the alt-right that the left "denies science, because there's only two genders" while at the same time they claim man made climate change is a myth/not possible. It's cognitive dissonance and hypocrisy at it's finest.

Aren't GMOs being unsafe a liberal belief? I certainly hear it more from liberals than I do from conservatives.

GMOs being unsafe is one of the primary conspiracies being pushed by Alex Jones and has been for years. At the same time definitely the hippy types think they're unsafe. Unfortunately science denialism has been growing on both sides for decades and they feed off one another.
 
I can't even tell what you're trying to say here. Can you speak in complete sentences?
I'll go ahead and edit the thread to spell it out more clearly but people paying attention to the drama on the left/right already get it.
 
"The leftist libtards are denying science can you believe how stupid they are? There are only two genders!!"

Meanwhile

>GMOs ARE UNSAFE
>VACCINES CAUSE AUTISM
>CLIMATE CHANGE IS A HOAX

GMO's and vaccines being unsafe are liberal beliefs that contradict science, usually conservatives don't fall for these.
 
Aren't GMOs being unsafe a liberal belief? I certainly hear it more from liberals than I do from conservatives.

Polls show that one is pretty split.

Really, I don't think there's going to be a big intellectual difference that goes left to right. The problem is that the political right has cultivated distrust of academia and the media. For the average person, that doesn't lead to skepticism and doing hard work to find out what the truth is--it leads to receptiveness to other crazy CTs and just believing whatever you want without regard to processes that we know are more likely to lead to truth.
 
Anthropogenic climate change is a non-issue for the most part.

First of all, oil/fossil fuel reserves will run out in the next century or two, not enough to do much permanent damage to our planet. Also, assuming fossil fuels/oil is a limited resource, does the rate of expenditure of these resources really matter? I.e., if we burn all of it in 30 years vs 300 years vs 3000 years, would the net global temperature increase be affected?

Secondly, global cooling will kill off way more people. We are at a peak in the Earth's temperature cycle, i.e. this is about as hot as the planet will ever get (just looking at historical temperature cycles data). Once things start going cooling down, way more of the population will be killed off. Food will be scarcer, we wont have any coal left to provide heat, people will have to aggregate to the few hot spots around the world and there will be massive starvation, overpopulation of certain areas, etc. So global warming is actually going to save a lot more lives than it costs, because it will offset the global cooling that will literally ruin most of the world (-10C global temperature). There is a reason why the more overpopulated countries in the world are mostly hot, while the most underpopulated countries are mostly cold.

Hurricanes could be an issue, but the science is still out on whether their intensity is directly caused by global warming.

Sea levels are whatever, there is plenty of land for humans to live on, and as the earth gets warmer then places in Canada, Russia, Northern Europe etc. become more livable. I.e. we will actually get more usable land (with ability to mine them for resources) than we would lose from the sea levels rising (which is mostly land that is already tapped out resource wise).

Lastly, more CO2 is actually good in some cases, because as we cut down massive amounts of forests we will need more CO2 to promote healthy vegetation.

The real issue is that we will run out of fossil fuels/gas/oil, which will render us completely fucked for the next Ice Age where we wont have enough energy for heating.
 
GMO's and vaccines being unsafe are liberal beliefs that contradict science, usually conservatives don't fall for these.

Anti-vaxxers are usually on the right. Trump is one, as are several other Republican politicians.
 
GMO's and vaccines being unsafe are liberal beliefs that contradict science, usually conservatives don't fall for these.
FWIW, not many liberals fall for it either.
 
Back
Top