Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bread Upon The Water who wrote (125259)	11/21/2009 11:07:52 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 543351

Well. ok, V. Let's go back to the Bachman point you make, then. I'm going to wind up on Allen and MP's side, as you might guess, though I might take a different path. Your argument is that because Bachman's political group doesn't accept scientific arguments for, say, evolution, they should not be considered "nutjobs." If I understand you correctly. And you argue that's because the "truths" of science only apply if they are accepted. So, because Bachman and her folk don't accept the "truths" of evolution, they also don't accept the "truths" of science, and, given their cultural norms, that makes them just fine. Not nutjobs. The problem with the argument is that in almost every other aspect of their lives, the Bachman crowd accepts common scientific "truths." If they get sick, they don't go to witch doctors; if the weather is not as they would like, they don't do rain dances; the list would be quite long were we to try to make such. But in this one instance or mayhap some others, global warming, they decide not to accept scientific "truths." It should be clear it's not because they don't accept science, though they may state as such. Rather, it's a segmented view, assuming it's not manipulative, at least for the moment. Some will certainly use it for these purposes. Thus, for me, you misstate the problem. It's not that they are opposed to scientific "truths." Just certain scientific truths." The question then becomes, why those.