Customer Discussions > Science forum

A vote for Romney is a vote against science


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-22 of 22 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Nov 4, 2012 8:55:26 PM PST
Ehkzu says:
In Governor Romney's acceptance speech at the Republican convention he ridiculed human-caused climate change. Didn't say he had questions about it. Ridiculed it.

His party's commitment to Christian Fundamentalism and the short-term profits of its hyper-rich patrons has required the Republican Party to adopt a platform profoundly hostile to scientific research, scienfific findings, and scientific method.

On climate change, pollution, overpopulation, abortion, contraception, the irrationality of "the market," and sociological research about everything from sex education to gun control and immigration control, the Republican Party has proven itself to be the enemy of rational consideration of the most important issues facing America and the world today.

Look at the constant barrage of anti-science threads in this forum posted by fools and tools. What percentage of them are, do you imagine, Romney supporters? 99% I'll wager.

As The Economist said, America can do better than Obama--but not with Romney, due primarily to his becoming a captive of the Republican Party's war not just on science but on rational thought itself.

Posted on Nov 5, 2012 6:41:36 AM PST
I laughed when I heard him do it too. I knew that was gonna rustle some jimmies!

Posted on Nov 5, 2012 7:08:56 AM PST
Rothery says:
Research findings and conclusions regarding climate change are anathema to big business and corporate interests. Probably less to do with rationality and more to do with greed, avarice, and power. Wall Street prefers the party who can fill their coffers best.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 5, 2012 9:04:21 AM PST
Ehkzu says:
True, their motivation is greed. Rational thought is collateral damage--if it's rational to oppose what you want, you need to shred rational thought to get what you want. The less educated people are, the more propaganda works on them, and the more likely they are to vote against their own interests.

Posted on Nov 5, 2012 9:55:59 AM PST
Rev. Otter says:
Occam's Razor strikes again:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7194/6887561135_f78ced95e9_o.png

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 5, 2012 8:16:09 PM PST
nonsense

a vote for romney is a vote for war with iran

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 5, 2012 8:22:32 PM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 5, 2012 8:26:14 PM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 6, 2012 5:09:02 AM PST
Ehkzu,

I'm in agreement with your OP.

If it was purely economics I would likely vote for Romney but it's not purely economics.

The religious right (what a misnomer) now has a firm hold on the Republican party and they are anti science. The Republicans were not that way until the mid 80's when Reagan became prominent. The deep south used to be Democratic but since the religious right took over the deep south consistently goes Republican.

It's a shame when you consider scientific achievement used to be the strong suit of the United States. We're forfeiting that leadership rather quickly. The scientific endeavor fosters technology which drives economic development.

It will be interesting to see how the voting goes today!

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 6, 2012 5:29:26 AM PST
John A. Gerling - "If it was purely economics I would likely vote for Romney but it's not purely economics."

Not to be tendentious, but... why? He hasn't exactly outlined an economic vision. "Let's cut taxes and regulations" leads to.... well, what Bush's tenure led to. The stock market has done extraordinarily well under Obama, and we've had close to three years of straight private-sector job gains. What makes you think Romney would do better?

Posted on Nov 6, 2012 8:03:42 AM PST
Brian Curtis says:
Faith in the "free market" is in many ways as unshakable as any religious belief. No amount of evidence will affect the True Believers.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 6, 2012 8:48:55 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 6, 2012 8:52:36 AM PST
barbW says:
Romney would probably overheat the economy, bring back inflation and encourage the exploitation of the environment (and the working poor) for the very few.

It's all been done repeatedly in the past. People of the poor and middle classes who vote for Republicans can only blame themselves, because there's plenty of examples now. ...But they're easily hoodwinked by twisted appeals to patriotism and 'freedom' and liberty and high morality, as if these were irrelevant to the other side... Lies and more lies.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 6, 2012 9:42:02 AM PST
Jon Covey says:
I'm curious about the scientific method. I've heard people spout that phrase, but it seems to mean different things to different people. Can you give me a clear definition of what the scientific method is?

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 6, 2012 9:47:24 AM PST
Rev. Otter says:
<<I'm curious about the scientific method. I've heard people spout that phrase, but it seems to mean different things to different people. Can you give me a clear definition of what the scientific method is?>>

here's a start :)

http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/project_scientific_method.shtml

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 6, 2012 5:23:18 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 6, 2012 5:24:14 PM PST
Ehkzu says:
The essence of scientific method is reversability.

That is, you test a hypothesis in a way to will either prove or disprove it.

Einstein said the "speed of time," for example, was not immutable. Extremely accurate tests of clocks in orbiting satellites proved this to be true. The trick is that they could also have proved it to be false.

Most people justify their beliefs through confirmation bias--starting with their conclusions, then cherrypicking the data to prove their point while tucking contrary data under the rug.

Scientific method is why astronomer Geoffrey Hoyle thought we lived in a steady state universe. Then various observations proved this to be false, and even though he'd championed the belief for many years, he accepted this refutation.

Of course there's a lot more to it--designing experiments and observations that will actually prove/disprove the hypothesis.

That's the difference between opinion surveys and push polls, for example. There are innumerable instances of clever, amoral people cooking the books, so to speak. It would take a college-level course in statistics to really see how Mark Twain's quote is true; common sense helps but it fails in many statistical areas because our intuitive sense of probability is skewed--kind of like everyone being nearsighted, and thus not seeing reality clearly.

The first step is realizing how much we human beings are driven by our emotions. You have to doubt yourself to get anywhere with scientific method, and many people are simply incapable of doing that. Perhaps a better comparison would be if we were all color blind but realized from science that there are colors we can't see.

Actually--side note--that's why we see many flowers as white. Actually no flowers are white. They're a color in a part of the electromagnetic spectrum human eyes can't see but insects can.

So you stand there looking at a white flower, but your scientific mind informs you that you have a problem of perception.

It's very hard to do, even though the basics are simple.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 6, 2012 5:39:08 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 6, 2012 5:39:29 PM PST
RR says:
Jon,
"I'm curious about the scientific method."

Why would you care? Your universe is the product of a capricious god, therefore unknowable.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 6, 2012 8:18:39 PM PST
Ehkzu says:
re: capricious god

I'm not religious myself, but 2/3 of American scientists profess to be religious in some way.

For them I think they think this is God's universe, and their work as scientists is devoted to discovering God's laws.

Our battle is not with such people.

Posted on Nov 6, 2012 8:34:04 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 6, 2012 8:50:50 PM PST
Doctor Who says:
Well, statistically this will not be a problem. Using some online data and a napkin, I calculate President Obama can expect about 278 electoral votes, not counting 42 votes that are too close to call by any stretch of the imagination.

EDIT: The President just had 274 electoral votes called for him. He gets another 4 years.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 7, 2012 3:31:39 AM PST
RR says:
Ehkzu,
"Our battle is not with such people."

But it is with Jon, who promotes the silly old cliches that because the universe violates the laws of physics, goddidit.

Posted on Nov 8, 2012 9:37:17 AM PST
D. Vicks says:
Weren't most Scientist doing weopeons research until the cold war ended?Know many scientist are being outsourced to

other countries.Like CERN.

In reply to an earlier post on Nov 8, 2012 5:58:36 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Nov 8, 2012 6:00:23 PM PST
JAG: If it was purely economics I would likely vote for Romney but it's not purely economics.

TS: Romney's economics is pure VOODOO economics and based on Trickle Down. Was surprised to see this coming from you of all people, pal. Right wing science and voodoo economics too often go hand in hand.

We escaped a return to Bush II's policies, when Romney lost! And I've been away debating Romney's "economics"/finance plans in great detail. This is my area of expertise.

For shame, he's bamboozled you here.

Posted on Nov 9, 2012 10:53:59 AM PST
D. Vicks says:
Science is your friend.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  15
Total posts:  22
Initial post:  Nov 4, 2012
Latest post:  Nov 9, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions