Prevalence of moon landing conspiracy theories

[rogue06]

Pro abortion is ideological, not anti science.

Not when it comes to claims that the unborn baby is nothing but a clump of cells and not alive.

[rogue06]

Never been to California or not there much I take it?

While it is true that anti-vaxers can be found all across the political spectrum as ox said, it is hardly a coincidence that nearly all the areas that we've seen a resurgence of diseases like Whopping Cough and the like happen to be in and around liberal strongholds.

[oxmixmudd]

To declare that the unborn are not humans is anti science driven by ideology.



Never been to California or not there much I take it?

Pro abortion/anti abortion is not a scientific issue.

I said i am aware of the fact anti vaxers cross the ideological spectrum. But they are not on the same scale as yec or anti agw.

Jin

[Cerebrum123]

Pro abortion/anti abortion is not a scientific issue.

I said i am aware of the fact anti vaxers cross the ideological spectrum. But they are not on the same scale as yec or anti agw.

Jin

Yeah, people who compare babies to alien parasites aren't antiscience.

[Sparko]

Jim to claim a fetus is not a human being but part of the mother so it can be destroyed is antiscience. Biology says that a new human being is created at conception. Most health nut anti-GMO guys are liberal. People who try to claim you can change genders by just deciding you want to be one of 57 different genders are anti-science and exclusively liberal as far as I can tell. Most people who are against Nuclear power are liberals. I think there are a lot of liberal spiritualists that believe in astrology and wicca and other new age nonsense.

[One Bad Pig]

The two largest anti science groups i know of are yec, which is almost exclusively evangelical republican and the anti AGW crowd which is also almost exclusively republican. Whatvanti science groups are there that are of similar scope on the liberal side?

Jim

I'm pretty sure that those who support the idea of being transgender vastly outnumber those who support YEC. It's also somewhat disingenuous to call YECs "anti-science" when what they are against is the mainstream interpretation of evidence pointing to the age of the universe and its constituents, not science per se.

[Mountain Man]

I'm pretty sure that those who support the idea of being transgender vastly outnumber those who support YEC. It's also somewhat disingenuous to call YECs "anti-science" when what they are against is the mainstream interpretation of evidence pointing to the age of the universe and its constituents, not science per se.

Right, same evidence, different interpretation.

[rogue06]

Right, same evidence, different interpretation.

So, do the YECs have a case? Or are they merely engaging in the denial of contrary evidence to prevent disparity between what is believed and the implications of the evidence (i.e., Cognitive Dissonance).

First it should be acknowledged that assumptions doFirstSecondscientific controversiesThirdquote-mininglook here. Pay particular example to the bottom one for an instance to what I was referring to. Ken Hovind cobbles together a quote out of lines from a book that were separated by at least 91 pages!

It is very difficult to believe that such butchery of the text as was displayed by Hovind could be done in any other way that was not a deliberate attempt to mislead people by severely distorting the evidence. And when you are doing such things as this you can hardly be claiming that it is simply a matter of having a different interpretation of the evidence.

And this is far from the only source showcasing creationist quote mines. Here is one of the larger collectionsSkeptical Inquirer

[lilpixieofterror]

Pro abortion/anti abortion is not a scientific issue.

When one argues for something using unscientific arguments, they are indeed being anti science.

I said i am aware of the fact anti vaxers cross the ideological spectrum. But they are not on the same scale as yec or anti agw.

[oxmixmudd]

Jim to claim a fetus is not a human being but part of the mother so it can be destroyed is antiscience. Biology says that a new human being is created at conception. Most health nut anti-GMO guys are liberal. People who try to claim you can change genders by just deciding you want to be one of 57 different genders are anti-science and exclusively liberal as far as I can tell. Most people who are against Nuclear power are liberals. I think there are a lot of liberal spiritualists that believe in astrology and wicca and other new age nonsense.

The moral ideas that drive the abortion debate are not science. Science can answer questions like when does the developing baby feel pain, when does its heart beat, when does it have brain waves. It can't answer the moral question of whether or not that developing persons rights are equal to its mothers. It can't judge under what circumstances it is acceptable to terminate the pregnancy and when it is not. We define those things based on our morals and our ideology. Science can't define what is wrong or what is right. That is a moral, ideological judgement. If our moral judgement says a person has rights once they can think, then we can use science to determine when that developing baby starts to think. But abortion is fundamentally a moral issue, not a scientific one.


Jim

[oxmixmudd]

I'm pretty sure that those who support the idea of being transgender vastly outnumber those who support YEC. It's also somewhat disingenuous to call YECs "anti-science" when what they are against is the mainstream interpretation of evidence pointing to the age of the universe and its constituents, not science per se.

It is not disingenuous at all. There is no proper application of science that will yield an age of the Earth less than 4 billion years, there is no proper application of science that will yield an age of the Universe less than twice that. They claim science supports their ideas when the reality is it does not, and anyone that knows any of the fields that they distort to any depth can explain exactly where and how they go wrong. There isn't a much clearer definition of anti-science or pseudo-science than YEC. They are so hostile to what science actually concludes that they feel they must do something to change it legislatively and have tried many times to get pseudo-science taught in schools as an alternative. It's just what it is.

And they do a fairly good job, because here you are thinking there is something legit (scientifically) about their position when there isn't.


Jim

[JimL]

Those in glass houses should not throw stones. Let's not pretend that world-view trumping science is limited to the right side of the political spectrum.

Who's pretending?

[One Bad Pig]

Thank you for providing this, at least. It's not quite as damning on its face as you imply, since the qualifiers on "evidence" would not refer to actual evidence - but it would not surprise me if it was used to dismiss actual evidence. There is a reason I no longer support AiG. I no longer think the YEC interpretation is especially likely.

That said, you're doing a whole lot of broad brushing in your screed, much of it having little to do with actual evidence. You complain of cherry-picking while engaging in it extensively yourself. Just my 0.02.

[Mountain Man]

No. Just no.

Yes, I've heard that song and dance before, and it doesn't get any better the more I hear it.

For the record, I have no firm opinion about the age of the Earth one way or the other. I think a good case can be made for a variety of hypotheses, and it doesn't much matter to me which one happens to be correct, because it doesn't change anything as far as my worldview is concerned.

[Cow Poke]

Yes, I've heard that song and dance before, and it doesn't get any better the more I hear it.

For the record, I have no firm opinion about the age of the Earth one way or the other. I think a good case can be made for a variety of hypotheses, and it doesn't much matter to me which one happens to be correct, because it doesn't change anything as far as my worldview is concerned.

...always go back to the Cross....