Republicans: A War On Science and how you are letting them win

[gamerunknown]

@Measure_for_Measure

Those veering off into crackpottery have secured far more influence in Europe than they have in the US.

Where, specifically?

@Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus

And after the war, our relatively laissez-faire approach helped create the largest middle class in the history of the world. But that resulted mainly from the fact that capitalists/entrepreneurs and American workers truly needed each other, since shipping jobs out to China was impossible.

How are you defining “middle class”? If it’s any worker not involved in primary or secondary industry, then changing proportions would depend on more efficient technique (a result of the technicians, or intellectuals of the bourgeois - not the entrepreneurs). Arguably, production could decline if importing were more efficient too (as long as another country has a comparative advantage in whichever aspect of production).

Also, we’d need to compare a country with similar starting criteria which didn’t have a lassez-faire approach, for whichever period.

[Measure_for_Measure]

@gamerunknown

Where, specifically?

1. How should I know? I posted that a month ago!

2. Full quote:

@Measure for Measure

Both sides have their loons. But lefty loons have de minimus traction. Take the thread that Bricker linked to. There have been serious studies and serious scientific concerns about the use and spread of GM pollen. Now some of those fears have been addressed by Monsanto and apparently some of the studies have been challenged. But that’s a normal scientific process. Those veering off into crackpottery have secured far more influence in Europe than they have in the US.

I was talking specifically about genetically modified food. There are plenty of woo-woo websites in the US on the subject, but they gain no legislative traction. In Europe however, there have been substantially more curbs on GMO. Admittedly, these 2 European websites aren’t the worst I’ve seen:

Archive-It Wayback Machine

GMWatch Home

Anyway, my point was that the GMO debate has generally has a better grip on scientific reality, alarmism aside. Anybody who wants to defend (or attack) the Europeans on this point is welcome: I see now that I was hasty to ascribe cranky motives to their regulation.

Another link thrown in for the heck of it:

Genetically modified food controversies

[John_Stamos_Left_Ear]

The Fark headline for this story is telling:

A new website full of manipulated ultrasound images and scary, medically inaccurate claims about the risks of abortion has been launched by group of virulently anti-choice right-wing religious nut jobs. Otherwise known as the Arizona state government

Sure enough, Salon reports:

(T)he Arizona Department of Health Services launched “A Woman’s Right to Know,” an informational website that uses manipulated ultrasound images and scary (read: medically inaccurate) claims about the risks associated with abortion to keep women from having the safe, legal medical procedure. State Rep. Kimberly Yee (R. AZ) and other Arizona lawmakers have not been shy about the intent of the website, either. As Yee told the Arizona Daily Sun, “the medical drawings, which are in full color and much more detailed than any ultrasound, may give some prospective parents additional reasons to reconsider their initial decision to terminate the pregnancy.”

The website was implemented as part of Arizona’s H.B. 2036, an aggressive anti-abortion law passed this year that mandates invasive ultrasounds and bans abortion after 20 weeks (based on medically dubious claims of “fetal pain”). The provision restricting abortion at 20 weeks has been blocked while the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals determines if it violates Roe v. Wade, which doesn’t consider a fetus viable outside the womb until 24 weeks. The ruling, expected as early as today, will decide the fate of Arizona’s law. Meanwhile, similar laws exist in 22 other states.

Medically inaccurate and emotionally manipulative claims about abortion are standard practice among so-called crisis pregnancy centers, which are religiously-affiliated (and sometimes federally funded) organizations that use shame and fear tactics to pressure women out of having abortions. Now this brand of anti-choice rhetoric and pseudoscience is being incorporated into a growing body of legislation and embraced by government health officials.

So the tax payers in Arizona are funding a website built and maintained by the state which has inaccurate scientific information on it.

The party of ignorance: This time, everyone pays for that ignorance. At least everyone in Arizona.

[Measure_for_Measure]

Also, as the Atlantic Magazine points out the Arizona website gives misleading information about the risks of abortion. They list fatality risks in strong language, but offer no comparison to the risks of carrying a baby to term. In the US, both risks are small, but giving birth is much riskier than having an abortion, in a relative sense. This is propaganda posing as medical advice shoved down the throat of the Arizona Department of Health Services.