XPost: alt.flame.rednecks, alt.alien.vampire.flonk.flonk.flonk   
   From: survey@stopassaultnow.net   
      
   On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 14:34:22 +0000 (UTC), lab~rat  >:-) wrote:   
      
   > Only 5% of Scientists are rightists.   Many of them get their science from   
   > Rush Limbaugh, a college drop out.   Rightists frequently confuse science   
   > with religion and most creationists are rightists.   
   >   
   > Insane, anti-science radical right wing foaming at the mouth bozos erupt   
   > in spastic frenzy's as they claim that science is not really science, but   
   > religion and that "real" science should eminate from the minds of right   
   > wing politicians, unqualified charlatans, energy industry shills and   
   > former tobacco industry PR men.   Most of the deniers are pin heads who   
   > don't understand basic science.  They frequently confuse weather with   
   > climate and constantly repeat lies, no matter how many times they have   
   > been debunked with facts refuting them.   
   >   
   > Drooling, Ape-Like Rightist Stooges Not Intelligent Enough To Grasp   
   > Science.   Rightists worship politicians who are beholden to big oil and   
   > big coal and would kiss Muslim ass by fighting sustainable alternatives.   
   >   
   >   
   > Few of the deniers have jobs, they sit around all day at their computers   
   > jibber jabbering with each other on Usenet swapping the same insane lies.   
   >   
   > That's what happens when all you're qualified to do is push broom like all   
   > the other "right wing bloggers who claim to be climate experts". They were   
   > probably a 9/11 conspiracy kooks or one of those idiots who think that the   
   > lunar landings were a lie, vaccinations are a government experiment, there   
   > were WMD's in Iraq and tobacco has no link to cancer!   
   >   
   > Most right wing retards believe that it's a big socialist cabal under Al   
   > Gore.  And when you point out that most major corporations are endeavoring   
   > to reduce their GHG emissions or the insurance industry (who most deniers   
   > strongly endorse in US health care) they start yammering on about how   
   > they're in on the great conspiracy as well.   
   >   
   > Then they continue to cite fabrications from dubious, amateur websites   
   > like "c3headlines", anonymous uncredentialed bloggers, crackpots, right   
   > wing think tanks and retired scientists turned fossil fuel industry shills   
   > for their "facts".   
   >   
   > Even more hilarious, the majority of the scientists they cite never worked   
   > in the field of climatology in the first place, so it's like citing the   
   > opinion of your dentist for a heart condition.   
   >   
   > Most of these idiots don't even go outside because they're so mentally   
   > unstable.   
   >   
   > Most Rightists aren't intelligent enough to be scientists, making them   
   > gullible and easily duped by snake oil salesmen.   
   >   
   > Only Six Percent Of Scientists Are Republicans: Pew Poll   
   >   
   > A new study by the Pew Research Center finds that the GOP is   
   > alienating scientists to a startling degree.   
   >   
   > Only six percent of America's scientists identify themselves as   
   > Republicans; fifty-five percent call themselves Democrats. By   
   > comparison, 23 percent of the overall public considers itself   
   > Republican, while 35 percent say they're Democrats.   
   >   
   > The ideological discrepancies were similar. Nine percent of scientists   
   > said they were "conservative" while 52 percent described themselves as   
   > "liberal," and 14 percent "very liberal." The corresponding figures   
   > for the general public were 37, 20 and 5 percent.   
   >   
   > Among the general public, moderates and independents ranked higher   
   > than any party or ideology. But among scientists, there were   
   > considerably more Democrats (55%) than independents (32%) and   
   > Republicans (6%) put together. There were also more liberals (52%)   
   > than moderates (35%) and conservatives (9%) combined.   
   >   
   > "These results were not a complete surprise," said Scott Keeter,   
   > Director of Survey Research at Pew, in an interview with the   
   > Huffington Post. He said they can be mostly attributed to "the   
   > difference between Democratic and Republican parties with respect to   
   > issues."   
   >   
   > The wide ideological and partisan gap among scientists may have been   
   > exacerbated by the Bush administration, which often disputed broad   
   > scientific consensus on topics such as evolution and climate change.   
   >   
   > Keeter acknowledged this factor, but said that "many of these disputes   
   > probably predate the Bush administration," noting that scientists have   
   > favored liberal views in numerous past studies.   
   >   
   > Religion also plays a role. Republicans tend to promote the centrality   
   > of religion more often than Democrats, and while 95 percent of the   
   > public said they believe in "God" or "a higher power," only 51 percent   
   > of scientists claimed either.   
   >   
   > "Many Republicans, especially the Evangelical wing of the party, are   
   > skeptical of evolution, and have argued for the teaching of   
   > creationism and intelligent design in school," said Keeter.   
   >   
   > The results could merely be a reflection of how scientists see the   
   > world, rather than of partisan loyalties. In a series of questions   
   > posed, the study found that the answers of scientists were   
   > consistently more in line with liberal viewpoints than those of the   
   > general public.   
   >   
   > "The Republican Party has a number of leaders within it who have   
   > challenged the accuracy of scientific findings on issues such as   
   > climate change, evolution and stem cell research," Keeter told the   
   > Huffington Post.   
   >   
   > "It suggests that scientists who are Republicans might feel some   
   > dissonance from the party's position on some things that are important   
   > to them. And while there are Republicans in the scientist sample,   
   > there are really not that many," he said.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > ----   
   >   
   >   
   > Expert credibility in climate change   
   >   
   >    1. William R. L. Anderegga,1,   
   >    2. James W. Prallb,   
   >    3. Jacob Haroldc, and   
   >    4. Stephen H. Schneidera,d,1   
   >   
   > Abstract   
   >   
   > Although preliminary estimates from published literature and expert   
   > surveys suggest striking agreement among climate scientists on the tenets   
   > of anthropogenic climate change (ACC), the American public expresses   
   > substantial doubt about both the anthropogenic cause and the level of   
   > scientific agreement underpinning ACC. A broad analysis of the climate   
   > scientist community itself, the distribution of credibility of dissenting   
   > researchers relative to agreeing researchers, and the level of agreement   
   > among top climate experts has not been conducted and would inform future   
   > ACC discussions. Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate   
   > researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i)   
   > 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field   
   > support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)