Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Study: Trust in science among educated conservatives plunges ("Science" == AGW)
Yahoo! News ^ | March 29, 2012 | Liz Goodwin

Posted on 03/29/2012 8:48:53 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum

Conservatives, particularly those with college educations, have become dramatically more skeptical of science over the past four decades, according to a study published in the April issue of the American Sociological Review. Fewer than 35 percent of conservatives say they have a "great deal" of trust in the scientific community now, compared to nearly half in 1974.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
What the left calls "science" is actually politics with a veneer of "science."
1 posted on 03/29/2012 8:48:58 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

translation: they ain’t buying the Global Warming B.S. anymore


2 posted on 03/29/2012 8:49:58 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Indeed ... the problem is with what passes for science these days.


3 posted on 03/29/2012 8:50:47 AM PDT by NonValueAdded (Steyn: "If Greece has been knocking back the ouzo, we're face down in the vat.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
There's a vast gulf between Science and what's being reported as "science" by the so-called "scientific community".

Gallileo was condemned "by consensus".

4 posted on 03/29/2012 8:50:54 AM PDT by Tanniker Smith (I didn't know she was a liberal when I married her.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Science is simply another political ideology today since the vast majority of science is funded by politicians.

You cannot get government funding without a political connection and that connection is always based on political ideology.


5 posted on 03/29/2012 8:53:44 AM PDT by edcoil (It is not over until I win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

This is nonsense. Science is science, it can be neither trusted nor believed in. It is or it isn’t. It is the bs scientists peddling their pseudoscience for political reasons that aren’t trusted or to be believed. They’ve sh6t the bed and now they get to lie in their own excrement.


6 posted on 03/29/2012 8:55:16 AM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Conservatives have realized that certain branches of science are largely funded by government grants. And that these grants are simply not awarded to ‘dissenting’ views.

Science whose conclusions are driven by politics is not science.


7 posted on 03/29/2012 8:55:41 AM PDT by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota

Precisely. Your characterization is exactly what I believe.


8 posted on 03/29/2012 9:03:40 AM PDT by RatRipper (I'll ride a turtle to work every day before I buy anything from Government Motors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

We believe in science. It’s propaganda we have a problem with.


9 posted on 03/29/2012 9:05:42 AM PDT by marstegreg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota
Conservatives have realized that certain branches of science are largely funded by government grants. And that these grants are simply not awarded to ‘dissenting’ views.

There are two main kinds of research:

1) Research which is funded to get a better understanding of something so that something can be developed from that understanding (better cure for disease, more effective weapons system, better fuel economy for cars, etc). This type of research is pretty rigorous and legitimate, because if the development stemming from the research results doesn't work out because of bad research, then the researchers are in trouble.

2) Research which is funded to prove a point that the politicians want "proven". This is generally scientific prostitution.

10 posted on 03/29/2012 9:05:44 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. - George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Study: Trust in science among educated conservatives plunges

They left one key word out of the title: Study: Trust in scientific community among educated conservatives plunges! I have complete and total confidence and trust in science. What I don't trust are the grant-grubbing sycophants who echo the Luddite party line to get AGW funding. The distinction is critical, and journalists are intentionally blurring that distinction.

11 posted on 03/29/2012 9:07:30 AM PDT by Pollster1 (Can we afford as much government as welfare-addicted voters demand?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RatRipper

When Darwinism was deemed as settled science by the left, All belief in science by reasonable people was lost.


12 posted on 03/29/2012 9:07:52 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (Solyent Pink is Sheeple!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Oh, isn’t that just SPECIAL of the left to re-define a term that everyone understands in order to further a political agenda....

they’ve never done THAT before, you know.


13 posted on 03/29/2012 9:10:51 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

With education comes the understanding that scientists are not gods.


14 posted on 03/29/2012 9:12:22 AM PDT by Constitutionalist Conservative (I'm a constitutionalist, not a libertarian. Huge difference.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I have faith in science... when it is done my “scientists” not political activists pretending to be scientists.


15 posted on 03/29/2012 9:13:43 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009 (Go Newt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
That's the thing about certain worldviews, particularly this religion of no-religion that pervades the popular media, like AP and Yahoo.

"Science" = "science community." No, I don't think so. "Science" = "propositions proven in repeated trial" indeed.

This is what happens when we agree to an incorrect definition of terms at the outset of a debate. I suggest "Big Science" for "Science" as suggested in the narrative.

16 posted on 03/29/2012 9:14:32 AM PDT by Prospero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Constitutionalist Conservative

My libinlaw was trying to use the “science” argument... nay, not argument, more like a leftist bullying technique,

to try to disparage what we are teaching our kids about the “biggies” of our time - Darwinism and AGW.

And the funny thing was, a few days later, she was talking about another topic - food - and said that any study that was over 5 yrs old was out of date and worthless.

“Was it wrong 5 yrs ago or has reality itself changed?”

I don’t think she got it.


17 posted on 03/29/2012 9:16:40 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz
When Darwinism was deemed as settled science by the left, All belief in science by reasonable people was lost.

"settled science" is an oxymoron

18 posted on 03/29/2012 9:18:45 AM PDT by BlatherNaut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
I trust Science, I don't necessarily trust Scientists.
Scientists are humans and can easily be misled, swayed or corrupted like any other human being.
The Scientific process, if followed, will eventually get it right.

19 posted on 03/29/2012 9:33:00 AM PDT by BitWielder1 (Corporate Profits are better than Government Waste)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BitWielder1

The Third Reich had “scientists” that believed in a Master Race, and that certain races were subhuman.


20 posted on 03/29/2012 9:34:52 AM PDT by dfwgator (Don't wake up in a roadside ditch. Get rid of Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I’m not half so skeptical about science as I am of lying scientists.


21 posted on 03/29/2012 9:41:22 AM PDT by Mr Ramsbotham (Laws against sodomy are honored in the breech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
Exactly.
Commies too have no problems subverting science for political purposes.

22 posted on 03/29/2012 9:41:29 AM PDT by BitWielder1 (Corporate Profits are better than Government Waste)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I always thought skepticism and science were synonymous.


23 posted on 03/29/2012 9:45:22 AM PDT by sonofagun (Some think my cynicism grows with age. I like to think of it as wisdom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

If you have to “trust,” then whatever it is, it ain’t science. Science is a procedure for identifying truth by experiment. If there’s not an experiment, with clear results, that’s repeatable by any researcher, the information is “religion” or “fiction,” not science.


24 posted on 03/29/2012 9:46:53 AM PDT by Tax-chick (The Commie Plot Theory of Everything. Give it a try - you'll be surprised how often it makes sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
I had a conversation about global warming with someone who has a doctorate in electrical engineering. I presented some technical evidence to him and his response to me was “Why would anyone risk their professional career on something was wasn't true?”

Where do you go from there?

25 posted on 03/29/2012 9:49:44 AM PDT by PeterPrinciple (Lord, save me from some conservatives, they don't understand history any better than liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steelyourfaith

AGW ping?


26 posted on 03/29/2012 9:53:03 AM PDT by Amagi (I challenge Barack Obama to call this Tea Party Patriot a "tea bagger" to my face.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

pseudo-science is not science


27 posted on 03/29/2012 9:56:37 AM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Trust in science among educated conservatives plunges...

We don't trust newspapers or the MSM either. Same reasons.

28 posted on 03/29/2012 10:03:10 AM PDT by GOPJ (Democrat-Media Complex - buried stories and distorted facts... freeper 'andrew' Breitbart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625
There are two main kinds of research:

Spot on! The research that private industry does is self funded and for private use. Think car companies, aircraft pharma, etc. The value they seek in science has to be right and can't be faked. They can't afford the dissasters that falsified science could bring.

Compare that with "knowledge" science (science not tied to production). Now suddenly mild alcohol use by heart attack patients can be beneficial and extend life according to one study. What?

29 posted on 03/29/2012 10:05:55 AM PDT by Tenacious 1 (With regards to the GOP: I am prodisestablishmentarianistic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

“Spare me your moral scruples. This is superb physics.” —Tony Shalub as Enrico Fermi, “Day One”, about the building of the atomic bomb.


30 posted on 03/29/2012 10:19:01 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I trust science. I don’t trust political ‘science.’ I have two degrees. Give me the data and I’ll draw my own conclusions.


31 posted on 03/29/2012 10:26:34 AM PDT by Darren McCarty (Time for brokered convention)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucianOfSamasota; E. Pluribus Unum; betty boop; marron; Alamo-Girl; r9etb; little jeremiah; ...
Science whose conclusions are driven by politics is not science.

Put more accurately, “Science whose conclusions are driven by political ideology is not science.” Hence, science education has come to be viewed as an information agency of government (that is, an information agency serving the interests of government officials and bureaucrats).

Hence the need for the separation of School and State.

They’re at it again Beep.

32 posted on 03/29/2012 11:06:24 AM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Yhea.....Global warming is the new Lysenkoism.

33 posted on 03/29/2012 11:11:57 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass ( Kill all the terrorists, Protect all the borders, ridicule all the (surviving) Liberals :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS

[ “Science whose conclusions are driven by political ideology is not science.” ]

Science is sometimes science fiction.. always has been..

Science fiction MUST be logical or whats the point of it..
Reality need not be logical at all.. Nothing to prove.. No agenda.. It just “is”..

Example: Intelligent life or any life at all on other planets has not a scintilla of evidence.. Yet its cute to believe that.. That is science fiction.. Many believe that as strongly as some believe there is a God.. Which is also unproven.. People believe what they want to believe facts have nothing at all to do with it..

The operative question is: What do you know? AND how sure are you that you know it?..


34 posted on 03/29/2012 12:02:25 PM PDT by hosepipe (This propaganda has been edited to include some fully orbed hyperbole...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS
I assume every scientific conclusion posited by a government or university study to be unreliable. The Left proves everyday that ideology trumps facts and reason.

Off topic here, but it has been fun to listen to the DOJ Solicitors attempt to square Tyrannical Obamacare with a Constitution premised on enumerated powers and Natural Rights. Everyone knows that Wickard/Filburn was nonsense yet feel the deception must continue. It's as if an engineer was told to start with F=MV and go from there.

35 posted on 03/29/2012 12:52:15 PM PDT by Jacquerie (No court will save us from ourselves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie
"I assume every scientific conclusion posited by a government or university study to be unreliable."

Surely, we must think unreliable any government funded university study not connected to national defense. And any others at least under suspicion.

Government Science must be understood not to serve the interest of Science, but to serve the interest of Government (that is the interest of elected officials and bureaucrats).

36 posted on 03/29/2012 4:58:09 PM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe
"The operative question is: What do you know? AND how sure are you that you know it?.."

I would say so . . . yes.

37 posted on 03/29/2012 5:06:22 PM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: PeterPrinciple; Alamo-Girl; YHAOS
“Why would anyone risk their professional career on something was wasn't true?”

Because there's little risk of exposure that one is lying. At least not from like-minded colleagues and politicized grant-making institutions. The assumption is always that a scientist is acting in good faith.

Only rarely do we see a scientific theory blow up in public, as has happened with AGW. It was a most instructive experience: "evidence" tampered with, misrepresented, even manufactured, all to support what boils down to an ideological presupposition, that Man is the Problem....

Anyhoot, it seems to me the problem is not with science per se; it is with a certain type of scientist — the ideologically-driven type, for whom "the end justifies the means." It should be clear that genuine science cannot be done at all, by a person with that expectation....

Thanks so much, PeterPrinciple, for that great anecdote!

38 posted on 03/30/2012 7:55:31 AM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I have faith in science, I don’t have faith in folks who manipulate variables to get predetermined outcomes and try to call it Science.


39 posted on 03/30/2012 8:02:33 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: betty boop; PeterPrinciple; Alamo-Girl
“ . . . it seems to me the problem is not with science per se; it is with a certain type of scientist

Shades of Ayn Rand! Two main characters in her seminal novel (Dr. Floyd Ferris & Dr. Robert Stadler) are a precise summation of what you are describing on this thread. Over fifty years ago this remarkable woman laid out for us, in astonishing detail, precisely what is happening today. She did not, in any fashion, subscribe to the idea of a Creator or a Creation (the Christian philosophy of Creationism, with which our protagonists seek to slander us by misrepresentations, rather than engage in reputable debate), yet in terms of the ideas contained in The Declaration and The Constitution, the concepts of liberty, of free enterprise, of free inquiry, of all the political ideas we hold dear, no material difference can be discerned between the two of you.

This is interesting, but it’s not clear to me what this means, perhaps other than that intellectual rigor and integrity are ecumenical.

Thanks for the beep. Always interesting.

40 posted on 03/30/2012 11:49:38 AM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS
If you can, take a look at the truth project, it is very good at comparing world views.

http://www.thetruthproject.org/

The echo from this for me is “Do I really believe what I say I believe.”

41 posted on 03/30/2012 12:35:42 PM PDT by PeterPrinciple (Lord, save me from some conservatives, they don't understand history any better than liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: PeterPrinciple

Thanks for the comeback.


42 posted on 03/30/2012 6:13:53 PM PDT by YHAOS (you betcha!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
Anyhoot, it seems to me the problem is not with science per se; it is with a certain type of scientist — the ideologically-driven type, for whom "the end justifies the means." It should be clear that genuine science cannot be done at all, by a person with that expectation....

I very strongly agree, dearest sister in Christ!

43 posted on 03/31/2012 9:19:27 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: YHAOS
This is interesting, but it’s not clear to me what this means, perhaps other than that intellectual rigor and integrity are ecumenical.

Perhaps that is the case, dear YHAOS!

44 posted on 03/31/2012 9:22:41 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

If you really want to understand the reason, you should start by asking why most military members don’t trust the top brass. The reason rests in the motivation that drives political animals.


45 posted on 03/31/2012 9:25:10 PM PDT by Grizzled Bear (No More RINOS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson