Ezra Klein: The Republican War ON SCIENCE

« Presidential Trivia | Main | Under 21 Softcore Porn! »

May 04, 2007

The Republican War ON SCIENCE

Steve Benen writes:

The Politico’s Jim VandeHei opened it up to the stage. “I’m curious, is there anybody on the stage that does not agree — believe in evolution?”

The camera didn’t show the 10 candidates for very long, but three would-be presidents raised their hand: Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, and Tom Tancredo.

First, this tells us that nearly one-in-three Republican presidential candidates reject modern biology. I’m trying to decide whether it’s bad news (that the number is so high) or good news (that more of these guys didn’t raise their hand).

It's a shame Vanderhei didn't ask what precisely they disagreed with, where they thought modern science was misleading kids, and whether they'd begin de-emphasizing other findings from the same perfidious minds (like chemistry, or physics).

May 4, 2007 | Permalink

Comments

The moderator should then have asked those 3 if they "believe" in milk and volcanoes.

Posted by: Matt | May 4, 2007 11:37:07 AM

That "one-in-three" logic looks weak when you remember those three have virtually no chance of winning the nomination. I was troubled too, but none of the serious candidates raised their hands.

Posted by: The Mechanical Eye | May 4, 2007 11:48:24 AM

They could have also asked:

* If they believed in anthropology which showed that young girls in Samoa were free to have sexual dalliances as they choose
* If women on welfare really were capable of holding down jobs
* If they believed that global overpopulation was a huge problem that makes our Global Warming scare look like a walk in the park
* if ticketing squeegee men and people who urinate in public would be like sealing shut the lid of a boiling pot
* if saving money is bad for the economy (vulgar keynesianisms)
* if belief in God is nonsensical because there is no empirical procedure to verify it's truth
* if there is no such thing as objective truth

Like it or not, the left needs to take responsibility to for creating a lot of wacky theories. And the grassroots of ignorant masses have a pretty good track record when going up against elite scientific opinion.

Posted by: Justin | May 4, 2007 11:53:25 AM

I think Tancredo's shot is hopeless... but I'm less sure that Brownback and Huckabee are toast just yet - both have considerable appeal and conservatives are not loving Giuliani, McCain or Romney. Brownback especially can slide in there, and The GOP DC pundits like Huckabee, and like him even better after last night.

Posted by: weboy | May 4, 2007 12:00:42 PM

Another lesson in contrasts. Crazy anti-science people on the left build big puppets and protest in the streets. Crazy anti-science people on the right take control of the government and cut science funding, put religion in the science classroom, and rewrite or ignore studies that conflict with their beliefs. Obviously an equal threat to science from both sides.

Posted by: SP | May 4, 2007 12:07:47 PM

If they believed in anthropology which showed that young girls in Samoa were free to have sexual dalliances as they choose

This is a "wacky theory" from the left?

Posted by: Stephen | May 4, 2007 12:22:50 PM

If women on welfare really were capable of holding down jobs

Um, they have to hold down jobs, if they want to stay on welfare. Where have you been for 10 years?

if saving money is bad for the economy (vulgar keynesianisms)

This is a left-wing idea?

if belief in God is nonsensical because there is no empirical procedure to verify it's truth

Now you're just messing with us.

Posted by: Andrew Levine | May 4, 2007 12:29:12 PM

Close your italics tags.

Posted by: SP | May 4, 2007 12:33:18 PM

War on Science, War on Ethics and Legality.... those Repubs luvs them wars.

For Law and Order fans: new DCCC internet video (at TPM Election Central)

Now, if they can just get Fred Dalton Thompson investigated, they'd have the whole cast in place.

Posted by: JimPortlandOR | May 4, 2007 12:59:11 PM

I don't believe in gravity, as the idea that bodies of mass attract each other is ridiculous. Instead, I believe in "intelligent falling," which notes that some universal force keeps us from floating away from Earth into space.

Posted by: JoshA | May 4, 2007 1:02:07 PM

Sorry.

Posted by: Stephen | May 4, 2007 1:15:21 PM

Argh.

I always forget how to do this

Posted by: Stephen | May 4, 2007 1:17:15 PM

"* if belief in God is nonsensical because there is no empirical procedure to verify it's truth
* if there is no such thing as objective truth"

A brilliantly ridiculous juxtaposition.

Posted by: Glenn | May 4, 2007 2:35:14 PM

As I pointed out at Carpetbagger, the 3 in 10 Republican candidates who don't believe in evolution is less than the 5 in 10 Americans surveyed who don't.

Posted by: Grumpy | May 4, 2007 5:48:29 PM

First, this tells us that nearly one-in-three Republican presidential candidates reject modern biology.

Highly unlikely that they reject much beyond the idea that humanity is the result of evolution.

This is a "wacky theory" from the left?

Margaret Mead

Posted by: Sanpete | May 4, 2007 8:01:04 PM

托盘
 托盘
 钢托盘
 钢制托盘
 塑料托盘
 木托盘
 木制托盘
 纸托盘
 木塑托盘