Conservative Political Forum

General Category => Alternate Boards => Conspiracy Forum => Topic started by: Sci Fi Fan on November 27, 2013, 06:42:49 PM

Title: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on November 27, 2013, 06:42:49 PM
http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2900289-2 (http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2900289-2)

The study found that liberals on average had more active anterior cingulate cortexes, the part of the brain handling, at least in part, error detection (Bush G, Luu P, Posner MI), decision making (Hewitt, John) and empathy (Decety, J.; Jackson).  Unrelated studies had found that repeat criminal offenders typically possess reduced ACC activity.  The ACC is also known to facilitate a greater degree of tolerance for uncertainty and conflicting viewpoints (Kanai).

Conversely conservatives registered larger amygdalas, which deal with more emotional and intuitive responses, particularly a heightened sensation of fear (Knutson, B; Rick).  To be fair, the amygdalas also handles parts of social interactions and memory.

Also a few more studies that should be self explanatory enough:

http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/low-effort-thought-promotes-political-conservatism-2012.pdf (http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/low-effort-thought-promotes-political-conservatism-2012.pdf)
http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/Amodio_Neurocognitive_Correlates.pdf (http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/Amodio_Neurocognitive_Correlates.pdf)
http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/Dodd_Politics_of_Attention.pdf (http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/Dodd_Politics_of_Attention.pdf)
http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/political-ideology-exploration-of-novel-stimuli-and-attitude-formation-2009.pdf (http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/political-ideology-exploration-of-novel-stimuli-and-attitude-formation-2009.pdf)

Thoughts?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: norwegen on November 27, 2013, 09:09:11 PM
Two isolated regions of the brain - the anterior cingulate cortex and  the right amygdala - are both associated, in some measure with memory and emotion.  At the end of the wash cycle, the liberal youths and the conservative youths are still sloshed around the same rinse water.

And the study involved youths - a group of people who generally don't even know where Scandinavia is.  When brains are less malleable, studies are more concrete.  Or at least more interesting.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Ragin Rebel on November 27, 2013, 09:50:43 PM
Liberalism is a mental disorder.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: redlom xof on November 28, 2013, 05:04:10 AM
I wont pretend to know what the majority of the science is behind these findings, but I'm always skeptical trying to correlate political opinions with science.

The environment one lives is the deciding factor with the issue of political ideologies. The persuasive power of the corporate media is far more damaging than any gene.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on November 28, 2013, 05:20:35 AM
Don't feed a troll that actually thinks phrenology a valid science.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: kopema on November 28, 2013, 05:32:00 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 27, 2013, 06:42:49 PM
studies had found that repeat criminal offenders typically possess reduced ACC activity.  The ACC is also known to facilitate a greater degree of tolerance for uncertainty and conflicting viewpoints (Kanai).

Doublethink isn't some brand-new science that was just invented.  It existed a LONG time before rational thought came into vogue.

The only difference between Communism and free enterprise is in who's running the asylum.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 06:48:11 AM
Overall, a variety of studies from independent sources seem to converge on the idea that liberalism correlates strongly with evolutionarily novel beliefs and strategies, whereas conservatism is rooted more strongly in tribalism and negative stimuli (ie. fear).  It's been found that liberalism correlates with higher intelligence quotients, atheism and male sexual monogamy, whereas conservatism correlates with lower IQ's, racism and xenophobia. 

To be fair, conservatives do typically donate more money to charity - a higher proportion even after you adjust for church donations.  Of course this may be rather misleading as conservatives tend to make less money, and people who make less money surprisingly are more charitable.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on November 28, 2013, 07:12:05 AM
Kid, you are so full of shit Obama needs to pardon you or else carve you for dinner.

If libs are that smart, why is Obamacare failing so miserably?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 07:14:16 AM
Quote from: quiller on November 28, 2013, 07:12:05 AM
Kid, you are so full of shit

And surely you have some evidence that these studies are all inaccurate beyond your say-so?

Quote
If libs are that smart, why is Obamacare failing so miserably?

If conservatives are that smart, why haven't we found any WMDs in Iraq?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: walkstall on November 28, 2013, 07:16:30 AM
Quote from: quiller on November 28, 2013, 07:12:05 AM
Kid, you are so full of shit Obama needs to pardon you or else carve you for dinner.

If libs are that smart, why is Obamacare failing so miserably?


I am sorry that does not mathematically compute.    :rolleyes:   :lol:
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 07:18:51 AM
Quote from: walkstall on November 28, 2013, 07:16:30 AM
I am sorry that does not mathematically compute.    :rolleyes:   :lol:

You mock my use of the word "mathematics"?  I'm sorry, just what exactly do you think election predictions were based on?   :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: walkstall on November 28, 2013, 07:24:57 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 07:18:51 AM
You mock my use of the word "mathematics"?  I'm sorry, just what exactly do you think election predictions were based on?   :rolleyes:

Yes I do.   :lol:  You need to pull your "mathematics" head out of you ass.   Predictions are based on what is ask and how it is ask and by what side is asking.

Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on November 28, 2013, 07:26:08 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 07:14:16 AM
And surely you have some evidence that these studies are all inaccurate beyond your say-so?

If conservatives are that smart, why haven't we found any WMDs in Iraq?
It's one thing to post this nonsense in jest, but to try and equate it to actual science is evidence you know absolutely nothing about real research.

Post this kind of shit again, and you'll find yourself accompanying it out the door with your ass in tow.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 07:28:11 AM
Quote from: walkstall on November 28, 2013, 07:24:57 AM
Yes I do.   :lol:  You need to pull your "mathematics" head out of you ass.   Predictions are based on what is ask and how it is ask and by what side is asking.

So you admit that your 2012 election predictions were based on your gut rather than the math?

Quote from: Solar on November 28, 2013, 07:26:08 AM
It's one thing to post this nonsense in jest, but to try and equate it to actual science is evidence you know absolutely nothing about real research.

Post this kind of shit again, and you'll find yourself accompanying it out the door with your ass in tow.

Perhaps you'd care to point out the flaws in methodology and where these studies err, rather than just vaguely dismissing them as "nonsense"?

You know, you once claimed that gases weren't significantly affected by gravity; who the hell are you to accuse others of ignorance of "real research"?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on November 28, 2013, 07:37:32 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 07:14:16 AM
And surely you have some evidence that these studies are all inaccurate beyond your say-so?

If conservatives are that smart, why haven't we found any WMDs in Iraq?

Why haven't you found a good reason to support America?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 07:42:02 AM
Quote from: quiller on November 28, 2013, 07:37:32 AM
Why haven't you found a good reason to support America?

This question makes no sense whatsoever.  Where are those WMDs?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on November 28, 2013, 07:44:58 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 07:28:11 AM
So you admit that your 2012 election predictions were based on your gut rather than the math?

Perhaps you'd care to point out the flaws in methodology and where these studies err, rather than just vaguely dismissing them as "nonsense"?

You know, you once claimed that gases weren't significantly affected by gravity; who the hell are you to accuse others of ignorance of "real research"?
Dumb ass, helium counteracts gravity.
Using my comments out of context will quickly get your ass banned, get it?

http://www.wimp.com/heliumdefies/ (http://www.wimp.com/heliumdefies/)
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on November 28, 2013, 07:56:43 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 07:42:02 AM
This question makes no sense whatsoever.  Where are those WMDs?

Of course you have no idea what anyone was talking about if you're ever asked to say something good about America. That's who leftists are, the children in need of fresh diapers and a hard slap on the butt when they start bawling.

What do you SUPPORT about America, that does not involve stealing other people's money for the crackpot causes you espouse?

You mean the WMDs we all knew Saddam put into Syria to play games with Hans Blix and that twice-convicted sex pervert that was working for him? Scott something, I think it was. Lovely people. Led by the nose while the real weapons went off-site.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 08:11:54 AM
Quote from: Solar on November 28, 2013, 07:44:58 AM
Dumb ass, helium counteracts gravity.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Helium only appears to defy gravity when it's a super-fluid, not when it is a gas (which your own video makes clear).  That is, when it is just barely above absolute zero in specific conditions not known to be found at all in nature.  And even then, it doesn't literally counteract what is currently defined as the curvature in space-time.

You tried to use helium as an example (specifically as a gas) to prove that "turning gravity" off would not cause objects to fly off the Earth.  You said this:

Quote
No, it's really not effected by gravity, it's a gas. (emphasis mine)

And here you post a video of helium at a super-fluid state?   :huh:

The wording of your sentence used helium's gaseous state as justification for your claim that it was not significantly affected by gravity.  Problem is, the sun is made of hydrogen and helium and its gravity is the only reason why it has not long since dissipated.

Really, reading over that thread again makes it all the more obvious you don't have a fracking clue as to what you're talking about; you even watch a video specifically talking about near-absolute-zero helium and conclude that it must be referring to standard helium in a gaseous state.  What kind of dumbass thinks that kind of ignoramus would have any competence in judging global warming or evolution?  You don't even understand the concept of centripetal force!

I don't know what you do for a living but I wouldn't leave it out of the question that you are good at it.  But you should hold some humility and realize that you are certainly no man of science.  Either rectify this issue by studying actual textbooks (read: watching videos on the internet won't suffice) or get out of the way and defer to experts in their fields.  Because science does not operate on your intuition or your gut, and science is not something you can bullshit your way through.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on November 28, 2013, 09:32:47 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 08:11:54 AM
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Helium only appears to defy gravity when it's a super-fluid, not when it is a gas (which your own video makes clear).  That is, when it is just barely above absolute zero in specific conditions not known to be found at all in nature.  And even then, it doesn't literally counteract what is currently defined as the curvature in space-time.

You tried to use helium as an example (specifically as a gas) to prove that "turning gravity" off would not cause objects to fly off the Earth.  You said this:

And here you post a video of helium at a super-fluid state?   :huh:

The wording of your sentence used helium's gaseous state as justification for your claim that it was not significantly affected by gravity.  Problem is, the sun is made of hydrogen and helium and its gravity is the only reason why it has not long since dissipated.

Really, reading over that thread again makes it all the more obvious you don't have a fracking clue as to what you're talking about; you even watch a video specifically talking about near-absolute-zero helium and conclude that it must be referring to standard helium in a gaseous state.  What kind of dumbass thinks that kind of ignoramus would have any competence in judging global warming or evolution?  You don't even understand the concept of centripetal force!

I don't know what you do for a living but I wouldn't leave it out of the question that you are good at it.  But you should hold some humility and realize that you are certainly no man of science.  Either rectify this issue by studying actual textbooks (read: watching videos on the internet won't suffice) or get out of the way and defer to experts in their fields.  Because science does not operate on your intuition or your gut, and science is not something you can bullshit your way through.
In the vacuum of space? It creates it's own mass dumb ass!
I'm not playing this bull shit game of back and forth gotcha with you, you have all but worn out your welcome with your refusal to address actual points, rather you create straw men and dare people to explain nonsense as if it is somehow valid.
Case in point quoted below, pure distraction from the topic, so if you have nothing to bring to the forum outside of pure childish nonsense, then fuckin leave, otherwise start actually addressing issues.
Last warning, do it or be booted!

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 06:51:58 AM
Why are you so obsessed with Marxism?  And then you turn around and attack liberals for pulling the race card.   :lol:

If you go to hardcore communist sites you'll learn that "liberal" is hurled around as an insult.  But you'd never do that, because to you "marxism" doesn't mean what Marx actually believed (which has nothing whatsoever to do with the democratic party's policy platform), but rather anything that threatens your beloved status quo. 

To demonstrate otherwise, feel free to list all of Obama's policies that are Marxist in nature, and we'll see just how badly you've butchered history.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 10:50:40 AM
Quote from: Solar on November 28, 2013, 09:32:47 AM
In the vacuum of space? It creates it's own mass dumb ass!

Creates its own mass...

creates its own mass...

thus violating the conservation of mass-energy, the most fundamental principle in all physics?  If you could actually prove this, you would turn all of modern physics on its head and doubtlessly go down as one of the most brilliant scientists in human history.  But far from winning the Nobel prize, you're just an ignoramus with no sense of humility or your own limitations.

-----------------------


Now, you think the OP's studies are bullshit.  On what grounds do you make this assertion?  Grounds, of course, based on noticing specific errors in methodology rather than vague blanket dismissals of scientific fields or appeals to your own gut or [as demonstrated to be nonexistent] expertise.  I've given you these:

http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2900289-2 (http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2900289-2)
http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/low-effort-thought-promotes-political-conservatism-2012.pdf (http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/low-effort-thought-promotes-political-conservatism-2012.pdf)
http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/Amodio_Neurocognitive_Correlates.pdf (http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/Amodio_Neurocognitive_Correlates.pdf)
http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/Dodd_Politics_of_Attention.pdf (http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/Dodd_Politics_of_Attention.pdf)
http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/political-ideology-exploration-of-novel-stimuli-and-attitude-formation-2009.pdf (http://2012election.procon.org/sourcefiles/political-ideology-exploration-of-novel-stimuli-and-attitude-formation-2009.pdf)

What do you have to say in response?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Cryptic Bert on November 28, 2013, 11:36:56 AM
Funny that these "studies' show the exact opposite of what we have witnessed over the past 5 years.

Racism: If we criticize Obama we're labeled racist by the left. Then they criticize us for not having minority candidates. However whenever we back black candidates they are immediately dismissed as "uncle Toms".

Fear:I cannot think of one time since Barry was elected that we weren't (according to the left) headed for a crisis or a disaster of some sort if we didn't immediately agree to whatever the Democrats proposed. If we don't pass the stimulus now we will have another depression. If we don't raise taxes on the evil rich now we have another recession. If we don't pass healthcare now millions of people will die. If we let the sequester cuts take effect planes will fall out of the sky. And the biggest scare tactic of all. Climate change. First it was the coming ice age. Then we were going to run out of food. Then the oceans were going to disappear. Then the ozone layer was eroding because teenage girls who watched MTV were using copious amounts of hairspray and we were all gonna burn to death. Then it was global warming which had to be renamed climate change. And the only way to stop our impending doom is to tax the rich, cap and trade, shut down the fossil fuel industry. We need to make everyone miserable in order to save the world.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 11:52:58 AM
Quote from: The Boo Man... on November 28, 2013, 11:36:56 AM
Funny that these "studies' show the exact opposite of what we have witnessed over the past 5 years.

Does it really?

2012's election cycle reflected quite perfectly how conservatives are less willing to modify their viewpoints upon exposure to external stimuli.  That is, you're less malleable to newcoming evidence and rational argument.

Quote
Racism: If we criticize Obama we're labeled racist by the left. Then they criticize us for not having minority candidates. However whenever we back black candidates they are immediately dismissed as "uncle Toms".

How do you explain surveys, then, where conservative voters are more likely to confess to racist and sexist attitudes?

Quote
Fear:I cannot think of one time since Barry was elected that we weren't (according to the left) headed for a crisis or a disaster of some sort if we didn't immediately agree to whatever the Democrats proposed. If we don't pass the stimulus now we will have another depression. If we don't raise taxes on the evil rich now we have another recession. If we don't pass healthcare now millions of people will die. If we let the sequester cuts take effect planes will fall out of the sky.

And remember when Bush and friends refused to believe that the economy was set to collapse?  Or continued to insist that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction?  Once again we see a level of cognitive dissonance among the right where reality is dictated by your personal ideology.

QuoteAnd the biggest scare tactic of all. Climate change. First it was the coming ice age. Then we were going to run out of food. Then the oceans were going to disappear. Then the ozone layer was eroding because teenage girls who watched MTV were using copious amounts of hairspray and we were all gonna burn to death. Then it was global warming which had to be renamed climate change. And the only way to stop our impending doom is to tax the rich, cap and trade, shut down the fossil fuel industry. We need to make everyone miserable in order to save the world.

You're trying to refute the mountains of empirical data and observation with your personal gut and sensationalist strawmans ("we were all gonna burn to death").
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Darth Fife on November 29, 2013, 02:42:14 AM
Liberals don't Think... they Feel!

-Darth
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on November 29, 2013, 07:05:05 AM
Quote from: Darth Fife on November 29, 2013, 02:42:14 AM
Liberals don't Think... they Feel!

And I'm sure you have evidence to pr-oh, you just felt this, didn't you?   :lol:
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Mountainshield on November 30, 2013, 04:54:10 AM
And yet ESS data shows the more right wing you are the higher your education is  :lol:

And this data compiled and analysed with funding by the European Commission, hardly a conservative organization, whereas your data is just biased shit  :lol:
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on November 30, 2013, 05:23:12 AM
Quote from: Mountainshield on November 30, 2013, 04:54:10 AM
And yet ESS data shows the more right wing you are the higher your education is  :lol:

And this data compiled and analysed with funding by the European Commission, hardly a conservative organization, whereas your data is just biased shit  :lol:

The higher the education, or the fewer wrong things you have to unlearn?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on November 30, 2013, 01:20:16 PM
Quote from: Mountainshield on November 30, 2013, 04:54:10 AM
And yet ESS data shows the more right wing you are the higher your education is  :lol:

Actually it's been shown that liberal candidates tend to draw in both the lower end and upper end of the educational ladder, because most members of the democratic party are not liberals; they're poor people who have more to benefit from progressive economic policies.  Republicans are more likely to have undergraduates as a result but less likely to have masters or doctorates, especially in the sciences.  If you disagree with me just feel free to modify your results to account only for self identified "liberals" and self identified "conservatives".

Google search "liberals vs conservatives education" if you wish.  The reality is that liberals are the most educated group by far in the States, followed by libertarians, and tied with fiscally conservative businessmen for the most affluent.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Mountainshield on December 01, 2013, 04:38:50 AM
Well including those last statements you made the conclusion is that the research you posted in OP is just politicized bullshit unless the brain chemistry between the states and europe are very different.

In any case most of these "research" base themselves on too few data samples, little to nonexistent random sampling and adjustments of the model to fit the desired result. These "biological" research still uses sociological quantitative statistical models which are very easy to base the model on the result you want.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Pearl Earrring on December 01, 2013, 05:10:01 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 27, 2013, 06:42:49 PM
http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2900289-2 (http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2900289-2)

The study found that liberals on average had more active anterior cingulate cortexes,

LOL
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on December 01, 2013, 10:38:00 AM
Quote from: Mountainshield on December 01, 2013, 04:38:50 AM
Well including those last statements you made the conclusion is that the research you posted in OP is just politicized bullshit unless the brain chemistry between the states and europe are very different.

That liberals average higher IQ's and education levels than conservatives isn't something documented in a single study from democratic underground.  There are literally dozens of papers on the issue and it's not as though the result is counter-intuitive; you even have conservatives such as Rick Santorum admitting that liberals are better educated.  It's common for the right to cast itself as the "common sense" alternative to those "liberal intellectual elitists", remember?

Quote
In any case most of these "research" base themselves on too few data samples, little to nonexistent random sampling and adjustments of the model to fit the desired result. These "biological" research still uses sociological quantitative statistical models which are very easy to base the model on the result you want.

Your criticisms are suspiciously vague.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 01, 2013, 11:37:19 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on December 01, 2013, 10:38:00 AM
That liberals average higher IQ's and education levels than conservatives isn't something documented in a single study from democratic underground.  There are literally dozens of papers on the issue and it's not as though the result is counter-intuitive; you even have conservatives such as Rick Santorum admitting that liberals are better educated.  It's common for the right to cast itself as the "common sense" alternative to those "liberal intellectual elitists", remember?

Your criticisms are suspiciously vague.
Using education levels is pure Bull Shit, especially when one considers they are nothing more than leftist indoctrination centers.
Aside the fact, an education is not indicative of intellect, quite the opposite, the best and brightest don't need college to be successful.
You put way too much weight behind a degree.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: kopema on December 01, 2013, 11:53:30 AM
Quote from: Solar on December 01, 2013, 11:37:19 AM
Using education levels is pure Bull Shit, especially when one considers they are nothing more than leftist indoctrination centers.
Aside the fact, an education is not indicative of intellect, quite the opposite, the best and brightest don't need college to be successful.
You put way too much weight behind a degree.

I've never actually seen a survey of this - and I assume it would be somehow horribly "racist" to perform one - but I'm pretty sure that if you took a group of people who worked in the private sector, and another group who are supported by the federal government (let's say, including civil servants and Welfare recipients, but not the military), the liberal/conservative ratio would be somewhere around 20/80.

I'm going out on a limb and assuming no one has ever been bored enough to try and research any of sifi's "documented evidence" of anything.  But if he's convinced that being a member of the Government Class is a statistical indication of either "intelligence" or "education," then he understands even less about the definitions of those words than he does most others.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 01, 2013, 11:56:53 AM
Quote from: kopema on December 01, 2013, 11:53:30 AM
I've never actually seen a survey of this - and I assume it would be somehow horribly "racist" to perform one - but I'm pretty sure that if you took a group of people who worked in the private sector, and another group who are supported by the federal government (let's say, including civil servants and Welfare recipients, but not the military), the liberal/conservative ratio would be somewhere around 20/80.

I'm going out on a limb and assuming no one has ever been bored enough to try and research any of sifi's "documented evidence" of anything.  But if he's convinced that being a member of the Government Class is a statistical indication of either "intelligence" or "education," then he understands even less about the definitions of those words than he does most others.
Yep, blind obedience to the cause.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: TboneAgain on December 01, 2013, 12:18:07 PM
Quote from: kopema on December 01, 2013, 11:53:30 AM
I've never actually seen a survey of this - and I assume it would be somehow horribly "racist" to perform one - but I'm pretty sure that if you took a group of people who worked in the private sector, and another group who are supported by the federal government (let's say, including civil servants and Welfare recipients, but not the military), the liberal/conservative ratio would be somewhere around 20/80.

I'm going out on a limb and assuming no one has ever been bored enough to try and research any of sifi's "documented evidence" of anything.  But if he's convinced that being a member of the Government Class is a statistical indication of either "intelligence" or "education," then he understands even less about the definitions of those words than he does most others.

Heh. Reminds me of those commercials in the early TV days... "Four out of five (dentists, doctors, whatever) agree! Our product is good for you!"

The cigarette preferred by doctors (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnKLpO9qhOE#)
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 01, 2013, 12:22:12 PM
Quote from: TboneAgain on December 01, 2013, 12:18:07 PM
Heh. Reminds me of those commercials in the early TV days... "Four out of five (dentists, doctors, whatever) agree! Our product is good for you!"

The cigarette preferred by doctors (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnKLpO9qhOE#)
Consensus, is science, but you already knew that. :lol:
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: kopema on December 01, 2013, 12:44:48 PM
Quote from: Solar on December 01, 2013, 12:22:12 PM
Consensus, is science, but you already knew that. :lol:

Another thing I've never actually seen, but I understand Glenn Beck has done a bunch of shows on how the Progressive movement latched onto mass marketing techniques; except they use free "news" programs instead of paid commercials to peddle their crap.  It's how everything from the federal "Food Pyramid" to the Alar, Ozone and Global Warming Scares got started.

As I've always said:  most people believe most things for the same reason they believe McDonalds is their kind of place.  And that applies to politics and science at least as much as it does food.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 01, 2013, 01:17:33 PM
Quote from: kopema on December 01, 2013, 12:44:48 PM
Another thing I've never actually seen, but I understand Glenn Beck has done a bunch of shows on how the Progressive movement latched onto mass marketing techniques; except they use free "news" programs instead of paid commercials to peddle their crap.  It's how everything from the federal "Food Pyramid" to the Alar, Ozone and Global Warming Scares got started.

As I've always said:  most people believe most things for the same reason they believe McDonalds is their kind of place.  And that applies to politics and science at least as much as it does food.
In 8th grade geography class, our teacher actually debated the class, that everything in the NY Times was the truth.
Yes, even back then liberals were that stupid.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on December 01, 2013, 01:28:01 PM
Quote from: Solar on December 01, 2013, 11:37:19 AM
Using education levels is pure Bull Shit, especially when one considers they are nothing more than leftist indoctrination centers.

Understanding how to calculate a material's modulus of elasticity is nothing more than leftist indoctrination?   :rolleyes:

You have to get your knowledge from somewhere.  If you're not well educated in a subject, either by your own serious research or formal schooling, you should learn humility and either defer to experts or try to learn more before you make up your mind.  Otherwise we get people like you, who have no understanding of elementary scientific principles (the sun can create its own mass... :lol:) yet smugly and condescendingly claim to know everything.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 01, 2013, 05:27:59 PM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on December 01, 2013, 01:28:01 PM
Understanding how to calculate a material's modulus of elasticity is nothing more than leftist indoctrination?   :rolleyes:
What in the Hell has that to do with anything? Do you actually think, that somehow makes you sound smart, using a string of words completely out of context?
The only stretching and I do mean Stretching, going on here is your own self inflated importance, you are proof that a little, and I do mean Little knowledge is proof of ignorance, one easily lead on by ridiculous studies.

QuoteYou have to get your knowledge from somewhere.  If you're not well educated in a subject, either by your own serious research or formal schooling, you should learn humility and either defer to experts or try to learn more before you make up your mind.  Otherwise we get people like you, who have no understanding of elementary scientific principles (the sun can create its own mass... :lol:) yet smugly and condescendingly claim to know everything.


What a fool, you actually believe we know all there is to know about the universe?
We can only theorize, but to claim to know how the Sun formed is beyond pure arrogance, or to know what it's center consists of precisely, because we have a vague understanding of the atom.

I love science, I also understand it's limitations, something you fail to recognize, I also understand that theories, are just that, until proven 100% beyond a reasonable doubt, not 80% through consensus of paid shills/whores.

But to make some ridiculous claim that one political bent has a higher intellect because a bunch of whores got a govt grant, when it's a known fact that the majority that vote for the Dims are low information voters acting in their own self interest.
That's right, freaking idiots.

But I'm curious, did you believe the findings of the study you posted unequivocally true, or did you view it with any skepticism?
This too is a difference in libs and cons, gullibility appears to be based in the anterior cingulate, associated with liberalism.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 02, 2013, 06:08:44 AM
It's pretty obvious what this study proves, that liberals are gullible and willing to accept pseudoscience as fact.
You, Scifool are a perfect example of useful idiot, you believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that man is killing the planet and it is imperative that the US stop all use of oil to save the planet, that somehow refusing to use nuclear energy is not part of this equation is irrelevant.
See the point here, or am I talking beyond you comprehension?

The leaps you make in your quest to prove you are somehow intellectually superior, screams emotional instability mixed with a heavy dose of fear, but I'm certain that no lib professor has done that study, since they are too busy trying to prove to themselves that backing big govt is somehow superior to self reliance.

And you wonder why I'm getting tired of your shit, you're like a pestilent child with a hammer, you see breaking down our culture as progressive, when every sane individual in the world knows you're simply dangerously destructive.

But the question holds, do you actually believe this shit?
I guess it goes without saying, because you swallowed AGW despite the evidence to the contrary.
I wish you could see what we see, a kid with a little knowledge. Remember when you told your parents you could make it on your own without them "I'm 16 and I know it all"?
Well, you're a little older and no smarter, and we see you as nothing more than an useful idiot for a destructive leftist agenda Hell bent on killing Capitalism..
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on December 02, 2013, 06:26:45 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on December 01, 2013, 01:28:01 PM
Understanding how to calculate a material's modulus of elasticity is nothing more than leftist indoctrination?   :rolleyes:

You have to get your knowledge from somewhere.  If you're not well educated in a subject, either by your own serious research or formal schooling, you should learn humility and either defer to experts or try to learn more before you make up your mind.  Otherwise we get people like you, who have no understanding of elementary scientific principles (the sun can create its own mass... :lol:) yet smugly and condescendingly claim to know everything.

You should start your own political party --- the Smugwumps. Then sit on your worthless rear and snivel that everybody's stupid, while you ALSO deny the science is not settled over the entirely fraudulent global warming scare.

What happens when serious researchers finally decide we are in fact going into a cooling cycle, proving you droolers wrong? How fast will you deny you ever spoke out against global cooling? How fast will you start singing whatever tune you birdbrains receive from halfwits telling you what to say?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: TboneAgain on December 02, 2013, 10:10:09 AM
Quote from: quiller on December 02, 2013, 06:26:45 AM
You should start your own political party --- the Smugwumps. Then sit on your worthless rear and snivel that everybody's stupid, while you ALSO deny the science is not settled over the entirely fraudulent global warming scare.

What happens when serious researchers finally decide we are in fact going into a cooling cycle, proving you droolers wrong? How fast will you deny you ever spoke out against global cooling? How fast will you start singing whatever tune you birdbrains receive from halfwits telling you what to say?

Oh, heck, that's already started. Just as KenyaCareTM has suddenly become the Affordable Care Act (a misnomer in a league with 'People's Republic of China'), global warming is already being morphed into 'climate change,' with the apparent implication that any change at all is bad, and cause for taxation and redistribution of wealth. Remember, it's only been a little over thirty years since some of these same Chicken Littles were making squealy sounds about 'global cooling' and the 'new Ice Age.'
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Cryptic Bert on December 02, 2013, 10:37:02 AM
The telling thing about this clown is he spends an inordinate amount of time trying to belittle and dismiss Conservatism yet he never ever discusses Liberal policies. He stays far away from the polices his masters have put in place.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: supsalemgr on December 02, 2013, 10:46:45 AM
Quote from: The Boo Man... on December 02, 2013, 10:37:02 AM
The telling thing about this clown is he spends an inordinate amount of time trying to belittle and dismiss Conservatism yet he never ever discusses Liberal policies. He stays far away from the polices his masters have put in place.

If liberals ever told the truth what they believe they would never win an election outside of the west coast or NE.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 02, 2013, 10:55:19 AM
Quote from: The Boo Man... on December 02, 2013, 10:37:02 AM
The telling thing about this clown is he spends an inordinate amount of time trying to belittle and dismiss Conservatism yet he never ever discusses Liberal policies. He stays far away from the polices his masters have put in place.
His obsession with trying to understand climate science, yet not bright enough to see the 100% prediction failures these so called scientists have made.
At some point, you'd think he'd ask himself what is the agenda behinds the drive, what is the end result, killing off our ability to produce?

Conservatives are smart enough to spot a scam from the start, which is why most of us ignore the claims they make, all backed by GIGO.
But do you see any studies trying to show the link of the liberal weakness in skepticism?
Of course not, Conservatives are smart enough to know they'll be ridiculed by anyone with the ability of critical thought, but not fools like Scifool, he buys any study disguised as scientific.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: walkstall on December 02, 2013, 11:18:59 AM
Quote from: supsalemgr on December 02, 2013, 10:46:45 AM
If liberals ever told the truth what they believe they would never win an election outside of the west coast or NE.

LOL  we need a law, that a town/city cannot be over 10.000 people   :lol:

That would blow the liberals mind. 
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: kopema on December 02, 2013, 11:25:45 AM
Quote from: The Boo Man... on December 02, 2013, 10:37:02 AM
The telling thing about this clown is he spends an inordinate amount of time trying to belittle and dismiss Conservatism yet he never ever discusses Liberal policies. He stays far away from the polices his masters have put in place.

I've noticed that liberals in general spend an inordinate amount of time arguing loudly about what they DON'T believe.

Whenever they try to say what they DO believe, most of it just boils down to self-congratulatory pap.  They take such heroic stances as, all else being equal, preferring "fairness," "justice," etc. to their obvious alternatives; while they tend to dislike such things as war, poverty and pollution.  All that really says nothing about their own political position, and everything about what evil inhuman monsters they presume all their critics to be.

But whenever you get down to the brass tacks of how they intend to pursue all those incredibly original and noble ideals, it's hard to find a hair's-width of separation between the statutes they recommend and those that a(n allegedly nonexistent) "real" Marxist would suggest to go from where we are now to one step closer toward the Fundamental Transformation into a "Workers' Paradise."
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: kopema on December 02, 2013, 11:56:25 AM
Quote from: quiller on December 02, 2013, 06:26:45 AM
What happens when serious researchers finally decide we are in fact going into a cooling cycle, proving you droolers wrong? How fast will you deny you ever spoke out against global cooling? How fast will you start singing whatever tune you birdbrains receive from halfwits telling you what to say?

That's the lure of collectivism.  When the Perceived Consensus changes - or even completely reverses - every liberal will suddenly start agreeing with that.  Some of the "smarter" ones (if that word even makes any sense in this context) might experience a brief cognitive dissonance.  But even then they will never, even for the barest fraction of a second, consider the possibility that they might have been somehow "wrong" -- with every fiber of their being, every single day for the past twenty years.

That's why I get a kick out of bringing up the perfectly proven and safe carbon-free energy source.  Even if you accept as Gospel EVERY contention of Global Warming, then there could be no rational reason for liberals to not immediately give up the their now relatively insignificant fears, finally agree with conservatives, and help push for nuclear power in America at breakneck speed.  But no liberal can ever connect even those ridiculously convenient dots, because the media are not telling him it's a part of the new Perceived Consensus.  He's still got the old propaganda about the evils of nuclear power passively smoldering in the back of his brain, but he's received nothing new to contradict it.  So it just continues to sit back there.

That's why nuclear energy is such a glaringly gigantic blind spot in the minds of Global Warmingists.  They don't "agree" or "disagree" with the obvious connection, even when it's shoved directly in front of their faces -- they simply cannot see it.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on December 02, 2013, 03:17:54 PM
Solar, you trying to speak about science sounds about as comedy worthy as me trying to speak about open heart neurosurgery.  You're literally making about as much sense as "if 5 + 5 equals 10 where does the + go?"

Quote from: Solar on December 01, 2013, 05:27:59 PM
What a fool, you actually believe we know all there is to know about the universe?

Quote where I say this, please.

Quote
I love science, I also understand it's limitations, something you fail to recognize, I also understand that theories, are just that, until proven 100% beyond a reasonable doubt,

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

You're shooting yourself in the foot, again.  By the nature of empiricism you can never prove any scientific theory "100% beyond a reasonable doubt".  Newtonian mechanics were never proven; indeed they were eventually discovered to be approximations at low fractions of lightspeed.  Einstein's theory of special relativity is perhaps the most successful scientific model ever devised yet it merely works to predict and fit observed phenomena; you can never prove it with absolute certainty.

A scientific theory is not a guess and there is no promotion it receives into "fact".  Gravity is a (poorly understood at the quantum level) theory; that the world is round is a theory.  At no point can you prove anything in any subject to 100% certainty outside of possibly pure mathematics.

But there is of course a difference between "well there's an 80% chance that global warming is real" and "I am certain that global warming is a fraud, so certain I'll refuse to even debate the issue".  There's also the quite clear double standard that you certainly don't have prove beyond 100% certainty of your economic policies yet you seem quite certain on them.  But like so many of your distortions there are so many flaws in your statement that I really just have to focus on one, that being that you have no understanding of even the fundamentals of the scientific method.

-------

Now moving past your butchering of the fundamental concept and principle of science, you still haven't explained why literally every reputed scientific community on the Earth disagrees with you over climate change.  Do you understand that the field requires tens of thousands of hours of study to become an expert in, and not just a few perusals of wikipedia?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Cryptic Bert on December 02, 2013, 03:55:01 PM
Where's my hockey stick...
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 02, 2013, 05:22:58 PM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on December 02, 2013, 03:17:54 PM
Solar, you trying to speak about science sounds about as comedy worthy as me trying to speak about open heart neurosurgery.  You're literally making about as much sense as "if 5 + 5 equals 10 where does the + go?"

Quote where I say this, please.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

You're shooting yourself in the foot, again.  By the nature of empiricism you can never prove any scientific theory "100% beyond a reasonable doubt".  Newtonian mechanics were never proven; indeed they were eventually discovered to be approximations at low fractions of lightspeed.  Einstein's theory of special relativity is perhaps the most successful scientific model ever devised yet it merely works to predict and fit observed phenomena; you can never prove it with absolute certainty.

A scientific theory is not a guess and there is no promotion it receives into "fact".  Gravity is a (poorly understood at the quantum level) theory; that the world is round is a theory.  At no point can you prove anything in any subject to 100% certainty outside of possibly pure mathematics.

But there is of course a difference between "well there's an 80% chance that global warming is real" and "I am certain that global warming is a fraud, so certain I'll refuse to even debate the issue".  There's also the quite clear double standard that you certainly don't have prove beyond 100% certainty of your economic policies yet you seem quite certain on them.  But like so many of your distortions there are so many flaws in your statement that I really just have to focus on one, that being that you have no understanding of even the fundamentals of the scientific method.

-------

Now moving past your butchering of the fundamental concept and principle of science, you still haven't explained why literally every reputed scientific community on the Earth disagrees with you over climate change.  Do you understand that the field requires tens of thousands of hours of study to become an expert in, and not just a few perusals of wikipedia?
Wait, I post an entire comment on the thread, and you run with this nonsense?
Try responding to the actual topic, and I still expect an answer as to whether you actually believe this shit.
My post below.

Quote from: Solar on December 02, 2013, 06:08:44 AM
It's pretty obvious what this study proves, that liberals are gullible and willing to accept pseudoscience as fact.
You, Scifool are a perfect example of useful idiot, you believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that man is killing the planet and it is imperative that the US stop all use of oil to save the planet, that somehow refusing to use nuclear energy is not part of this equation is irrelevant.
See the point here, or am I talking beyond you comprehension?

The leaps you make in your quest to prove you are somehow intellectually superior, screams emotional instability mixed with a heavy dose of fear, but I'm certain that no lib professor has done that study, since they are too busy trying to prove to themselves that backing big govt is somehow superior to self reliance.

And you wonder why I'm getting tired of your shit, you're like a pestilent child with a hammer, you see breaking down our culture as progressive, when every sane individual in the world knows you're simply dangerously destructive.

But the question holds, do you actually believe this shit?
I guess it goes without saying, because you swallowed AGW despite the evidence to the contrary.
I wish you could see what we see, a kid with a little knowledge. Remember when you told your parents you could make it on your own without them "I'm 16 and I know it all"?
Well, you're a little older and no smarter, and we see you as nothing more than an useful idiot for a destructive leftist agenda Hell bent on killing Capitalism..
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 02, 2013, 05:23:44 PM
Quote from: The Boo Man... on December 02, 2013, 03:55:01 PM
Where's my hockey stick...
Yeah, they used that to lie with as well.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Cryptic Bert on December 02, 2013, 06:48:46 PM
Quote from: Solar on December 02, 2013, 05:23:44 PM
Yeah, they used that to lie with as well.

And this idiot claims Conservatives are more emotional.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 04, 2013, 08:26:38 PM
Quote from: The Boo Man... on December 02, 2013, 06:48:46 PM
And this idiot claims Conservatives are more emotional.
I'm guessing he ran from his own thread, after getting his ass handed to him when I proved Obozo is a Marxist.
His handlers called him back for reprogramming, training.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on December 04, 2013, 08:40:12 PM
Quote from: Solar on December 04, 2013, 08:26:38 PM
I'm guessing he ran from his own thread, after getting his ass handed to him when I proved Obozo is a Marxist.
His handlers called him back for reprogramming, training.

He's been avoiding several threads. Bert's also been doing the chew-toy number on him. The troll's laughable insistence that the science is settled is now an open joke if the Boston Globe allows the Jeff Jacoby item challenging that very precept. The media is finally drawing a deep breath and cooling down their heat on the hot-air science they've been spewing.


http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/12/04/climate-alarmists-science-isn-settled-majority-vote/CZEk7XP10TfvpiiJ04zulK/story.html (http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/12/04/climate-alarmists-science-isn-settled-majority-vote/CZEk7XP10TfvpiiJ04zulK/story.html)
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Pearl Earrring on December 05, 2013, 01:02:27 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 28, 2013, 07:14:16 AM
If conservatives are that smart, why haven't we found any WMDs in Iraq?

Daft comment. :huh:
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: taxed on December 05, 2013, 01:07:56 AM
Nobody smart buys into man made global warming.  Only academic bottom feeders are that gullible...
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 05, 2013, 06:59:38 AM
Quote from: taxed on December 05, 2013, 01:07:56 AM
Nobody smart buys into man made global warming.  Only academic bottom feeders are that gullible...
And here is what REAL Scientists are saying.
S. Fred Singer is professor emeritus at the University of Virginia and director of the Science & Environmental Policy Project. His specialty is atmospheric and space physics. An expert in remote sensing and satellites, he served as the founding director of the US Weather Satellite Service and, more recently, as vice chair of the US National Advisory Committee on Oceans & Atmosphere. He is a Senior Fellow of the Heartland Institute and the Independent Institute, and an elected Fellow of several scientific societies. He co-authored the NY Times best-seller "Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 years." In 2007, he founded and has since chaired the NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change), which has released several scientific reports [See www.NIPCCreport.org (http://www.nipccreport.org)]. For recent writings see http://www.americanthinker.com/s_fred_singer/ (http://www.americanthinker.com/s_fred_singer/) and also Google Scholar.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on December 05, 2013, 07:24:21 AM
Quote from: Pearl Earrring on December 05, 2013, 01:02:27 AM
Daft comment. :huh:

For him, typical. Unable to process information not cleared by his leftist masters, his default setting is to change the subject (usually some vastly outdated jibe). In this case, we are now in the fifth year of the Obama Trauma, the GOP does not control Congress --- and yet he tries to blame the right wing for failing to accomplish thus-and-so.

(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages114.fotki.com%2Fv74%2Fphotos%2F1%2F1595431%2F10201489%2Fleftistgenius-vi.png&hash=735044a6b0452234906df95bb6c49cc3ccf0a558)
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on December 05, 2013, 06:24:18 PM
Quote from: Solar on December 02, 2013, 05:22:58 PM
Wait, I post an entire comment on the thread, and you run with this nonsense?

How is it nonsense to point out to you the existence of the law of conservation of mass-energy and Newton's laws of motion, both of whom you just openly flouted?

Do you not find it ironic that someone who doesn't understand the most fundamental foundations of physics smugly holds the entire scientific community in contempt?

Quote
Try responding to the actual topic, and I still expect an answer as to whether you actually believe this shit.
My post below.

You claim that it is pseudoscience but offer no specific criticisms or counterarguments beyond your say-so.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: taxed on December 05, 2013, 06:39:13 PM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on December 05, 2013, 06:24:18 PM
How is it nonsense to point out to you the existence of the law of conservation of mass-energy and Newton's laws of motion, both of whom you just openly flouted?

Do you not find it ironic that someone who doesn't understand the most fundamental foundations of physics smugly holds the entire scientific community in contempt?

You claim that it is pseudoscience but offer no specific criticisms or counterarguments beyond your say-so.

http://www.dailytech.com/After+Missing+5+Predictions+IPCC+Cuts+Global+Warming+Forecast/article33457.htm (http://www.dailytech.com/After+Missing+5+Predictions+IPCC+Cuts+Global+Warming+Forecast/article33457.htm)
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on December 05, 2013, 06:46:06 PM
Quote from: taxed on December 05, 2013, 06:39:13 PM
http://www.dailytech.com/After+Missing+5+Predictions+IPCC+Cuts+Global+Warming+Forecast/article33457.htm (http://www.dailytech.com/After+Missing+5+Predictions+IPCC+Cuts+Global+Warming+Forecast/article33457.htm)

Scientists at CERN also had to retract claims of detecting faster-than-light neutrinos.  Does this suggest that neutrinos do not exist, and/or that Einstein's theory of special relativity is fraudulent?

Try again.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 06, 2013, 05:56:34 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on December 05, 2013, 06:24:18 PM
How is it nonsense to point out to you the existence of the law of conservation of mass-energy and Newton's laws of motion, both of whom you just openly flouted?

Do you not find it ironic that someone who doesn't understand the most fundamental foundations of physics smugly holds the entire scientific community in contempt?

You claim that it is pseudoscience but offer no specific criticisms or counterarguments beyond your say-so.
KEEP DODGING AT YOUR OWN PERIL SON.

It's pretty obvious what this study proves, that liberals are gullible and willing to accept pseudoscience as fact.
You, Scifool are a perfect example of useful idiot, you believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that man is killing the planet and it is imperative that the US stop all use of oil to save the planet, that somehow refusing to use nuclear energy is not part of this equation is irrelevant.
See the point here, or am I talking beyond you comprehension?

The leaps you make in your quest to prove you are somehow intellectually superior, screams emotional instability mixed with a heavy dose of fear, but I'm certain that no lib professor has done that study, since they are too busy trying to prove to themselves that backing big govt is somehow superior to self reliance.

And you wonder why I'm getting tired of your shit, you're like a pestilent child with a hammer, you see breaking down our culture as progressive, when every sane individual in the world knows you're simply dangerously destructive.

But the question holds, do you actually believe this shit?
I guess it goes without saying, because you swallowed AGW despite the evidence to the contrary.
I wish you could see what we see, a kid with a little knowledge. Remember when you told your parents you could make it on your own without them "I'm 16 and I know it all"?
Well, you're a little older and no smarter, and we see you as nothing more than an useful idiot for a destructive leftist agenda Hell bent on killing Capitalism..
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on December 06, 2013, 06:40:23 AM
We should start sending quotes from this boy to this place....

http://www.worldwideinterweb.com/item/6131-the-20-dumbest-things-ever-said-on-the-internet.html (http://www.worldwideinterweb.com/item/6131-the-20-dumbest-things-ever-said-on-the-internet.html)
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: taxed on December 06, 2013, 03:57:36 PM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on December 05, 2013, 06:46:06 PM
Scientists at CERN also had to retract claims of detecting faster-than-light neutrinos.  Does this suggest that neutrinos do not exist, and/or that Einstein's theory of special relativity is fraudulent?

Try again.

Your straw man analogy might work on other academics and others with no experience or desire to educate themselves, but that doesn't work here.  You are comparing real science with your AGW fairy tale.  Please save the low-intellect arguments for your academic peers.  You have yet to make any case for a crisis, warming, or anything to remotely support your fallacy.

At some point you need to ask yourself why you continue with this idiocy.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on December 08, 2013, 07:56:27 AM
Quote from: Solar on December 06, 2013, 05:56:34 AM
It's pretty obvious

Prove it.  Show errors in methodology or provide counterexamples.  Declaring something to be self evident was tried once in science - it left us with geocentrism and aristotelian physics. 
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 08, 2013, 08:02:52 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on December 08, 2013, 07:56:27 AM
Prove it.  Show errors in methodology or provide counterexamples.  Declaring something to be self evident was tried once in science - it left us with geocentrism and aristotelian physics.
Wrong son, you do not redirect on this forum! So answer my question first.

Do you actually believe this shit? Yes or no, any other answer is evidence you need a qualifier, which would be proof you didn't swallow this nonsense either.

So yes or no, do you own it?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Sci Fi Fan on December 08, 2013, 08:09:13 AM
Quote from: Solar on December 08, 2013, 08:02:52 AM
Wrong son, you do not redirect on this forum! So answer my question first.

Do you actually believe this shit? Yes or no, any other answer is evidence you need a qualifier, which would be proof you didn't swallow this nonsense either.

So yes or no, do you own it?

Of course I don't believe it.  Science is not predicated on belief.  I have read the studies and have seen no errors in methodology, so I accept it as valid theory.

Now, on what grounds do you reject these studies?  Where is your justification?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 08, 2013, 08:41:49 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on December 08, 2013, 08:09:13 AM
Of course I don't believe it.  Science is not predicated on belief.  I have read the studies and have seen no errors in methodology, so I accept it as valid theory.

Now, on what grounds do you reject these studies?  Where is your justification?
So you don't believe it, yet you believe it, which is it?
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: kopema on December 08, 2013, 09:43:32 AM
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on December 08, 2013, 07:56:27 AM
QuoteIt's pretty obvious what this study proves
Prove it.  Show errors in methodology or provide counterexamples. 

Translation:  "If you're so smart, then prove that you're wrong and I'm right!"

BTW:  Your cutting and pasting skills are almost as bad as your reading comprehension skills - and that's saying an awful lot.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 08, 2013, 10:28:04 AM
Quote from: kopema on December 08, 2013, 09:43:32 AM
Prove it.  Show errors in methodology or provide counterexamples. 

Translation:  "If you're so smart, then prove that you're wrong and I'm right!"

BTW:  Your cutting and pasting skills are almost as bad as your reading comprehension skills - and that's saying an awful lot.
The kid is a wonder in contradiction, it's a scientific anomaly he even functions at all.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on December 08, 2013, 10:49:01 AM
Quote from: Solar on December 08, 2013, 10:28:04 AM
The kid is a wonder in contradiction, it's a scientific anomaly he even functions at all.

At first he was amusing.

(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages9.fotki.com%2Fv1542%2Fphotos%2F1%2F1595431%2F10202196%2Fanimatedwrestler_leap-vi.gif&hash=832233f7f0ff5a35c747a436630aa6b3e51eb74c)
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: walkstall on December 08, 2013, 10:53:22 AM
Quote from: quiller on December 08, 2013, 10:49:01 AM
At first he was amusing.

(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages9.fotki.com%2Fv1542%2Fphotos%2F1%2F1595431%2F10202196%2Fanimatedwrestler_leap-vi.gif&hash=832233f7f0ff5a35c747a436630aa6b3e51eb74c)

I miss Jas!
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on December 08, 2013, 11:37:55 AM
Quote from: walkstall on December 08, 2013, 10:53:22 AM
I miss Jas!

As do I. She remains the global champion with a metal folding-chair on airhead skulls.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: walkstall on December 08, 2013, 11:52:23 AM
Quote from: quiller on December 08, 2013, 11:37:55 AM
As do I. She remains the global champion with a metal folding-chair on airhead skulls.

Last PM I got for her was July 15, 2013.  Hope is ok.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on December 08, 2013, 11:56:47 AM
Quote from: walkstall on December 08, 2013, 11:52:23 AM
Last PM I got for her was July 15, 2013.  Hope is ok.

In all probability she married and is weathering the Obama Trauma as best as she can. Absolutely nobody topped her during the time she was active, and then it just started getting less frequent.

Of course the trolls taking over there had NOTHING to do with it, I'm sure.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Solar on December 08, 2013, 11:59:43 AM
Quote from: quiller on December 08, 2013, 10:49:01 AM
At first he was amusing.

(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages9.fotki.com%2Fv1542%2Fphotos%2F1%2F1595431%2F10202196%2Fanimatedwrestler_leap-vi.gif&hash=832233f7f0ff5a35c747a436630aa6b3e51eb74c)
LOL! :biggrin:
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on December 08, 2013, 12:19:10 PM
Quote from: Solar on December 08, 2013, 11:59:43 AM
LOL! :biggrin:

How many times do you have to warn this clod to actually answer your questions? I have counted at least a dozen times, just recently.

(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages53.fotki.com%2Fv1519%2Fphotos%2F1%2F1595431%2F8259098%2Fsmoking_permitted-vi.png&hash=1e0532ecc5c7ed460c05b023f09d5246d73fa948)
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: walkstall on December 08, 2013, 12:20:31 PM
Quote from: quiller on December 08, 2013, 11:56:47 AM
In all probability she married and is weathering the Obama Trauma as best as she can. Absolutely nobody topped her during the time she was active, and then it just started getting less frequent.

Of course the trolls taking over there had NOTHING to do with it, I'm sure.

That was not the impression I get from her over the first 7 months of the year. 
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: quiller on December 08, 2013, 12:29:22 PM
Quote from: walkstall on December 08, 2013, 12:20:31 PM
That was not the impression I get from her over the first 7 months of the year.

True, she didn't seem in any rush, but it was always a possibility. I'll think up other positive reasons, just gimme a moment.  :wink:

Where oh where is Arpad? The closest thing I've seen to a wizard at digging out facts about Michigan education.

... Sometimes it's best to celebrate that we knew of someone at all.
Title: Re: Liberals vs Conservative thought differences: What does the Science say?
Post by: Pearl Earrring on December 19, 2013, 07:19:30 AM
Oh for some sanity.
 
Respite from a troll infested forum, where the lefty's are getting all worked up about Megyn Kelly and Santa Claus.