Liberals and science

     Any half-baked theory having the word “science” attached to it can gather an enthusiastic, if somewhat-gullible left-wing following.  The left twists any and every discreet issue and politicizing them into usual culture war agenda items.  If science is properly understood, it would not be political at all, neither right nor left. The law of gravity or the point of combustion care not a whit about right, left, conservative, liberal , Republican or Democrat. 

     For example, biology, a genuine science, recognizes two sexes – two human genders – male and female. If there is such a thing as “settled science,” there it is. The biological sexes are determined by scientific reality -- DNA. Biological females have XX chromosomes; biological males have XY chromosomes. More easily-recognized gender differences include that biological women have concave genitalia and produce eggs; biological men are convex and produce sperm to fertilize female ova. Preservation of our species depends upon simple biology and physiology.  According to the “scientific” left, though, biology is outdated. Gender is now a social construct, an idea. Anyone can be a man, a woman or a trans-either. Pick one of those, one of  54 other ''gender options''' recognized by Facebook or imagine your own. But they don’t change biology.

     Amusingly, many liberals who tell us that denying biological science is a moral imperative, simultaneously insist that questioning global warming as “settled science” should be a criminal offense , even though, a few decades ago, many of them worried about a new Ice Age.

In and around Earth Day 1970 some so called "scientists" said the things below. Notice they all lean politically left. But we should really really listen to them this time, cause they swearsy's...

“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” — Harvard biologist George Wald

“We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation.” — Washington University biologist Barry Commoner

“Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.” — New York Times editorial



“Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” — Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich

“Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born… [By 1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.” — Paul Ehrlich



“It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” — Denis Hayes, Chief organizer for Earth Day

“Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions…. By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” — North Texas State University professor Peter Gunter

“In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution… by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half.” — Life magazine
“At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt

“Air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” — Paul Ehrlich

 



“By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate… that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt

“[One] theory assumes that the earth’s cloud cover will continue to thicken as more dust, fumes, and water vapor are belched into the atmosphere by industrial smokestacks and jet planes. Screened from the sun’s heat, the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born.” — Newsweek magazine

“The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” — Kenneth Watt



Is America a better place or a worse place since the Government began listening to these people and later inserting them into the bureaucracy?  Liberals insist that left-wing social and political orthodoxies are moral imperatives, but, ironically, their entrenched beliefs never seem important enough to invest any time or effort into understanding points of disagreement or persuading the other side. The left’s natural tendency is to insult everyone who doesn’t agree and, then, implicitly, congratulate themselves for their own imagined superiority.
But practical people aren’t self-absorbed or arrogant enough to assume they can alter biological science or “fix” climate. They’d rather dispense with the left’s moral preening and deal with facts, including the inconvenient facts progressives ignore.