# RWs are not stupid; it's much worse than that **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 23, 2012, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856 "2012-05-23T17:55:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/81 "2012-05-24T22:06:31Z")
> [@PBear42](#): > > This is as true of the left as it is of the right. FWIW, I’m on the left. I see what you see there, but I also see the false equivalency. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/82 "2012-05-24T22:07:33Z")
> [@Swords\_to\_Plowshares](#): > > Conservapedia is almost entirely the work of one man, Andy Schafly. It shouldn’t be extrapolated to make any point about conservatives as a whole. Schlafly, or LW trolls? Let’s make up our minds here. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/83 "2012-05-24T22:08:45Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I can take that challenge. > > In fact, I’d love to toss that exact challenge back to the OP. [Done upthread.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15094873&postcount=34) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/84 "2012-05-24T22:11:07Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > I sit corrected. I tried a similar experiment several years ago and my account wasn’t approved. I don’t know if they’ve changed their policy, I was editing contentious article, or, perhaps, have confused Conservapedia with some other Rightwingapedia. Metapedia, perhaps? (A White Nationalist online encyclopedia, which it might violate the Board’s hate-speech rules even to link, but you can google the name.) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/85 "2012-05-24T22:12:46Z")
> [@Randvek](#): > > Ah, but a lot of the opposition to global warming _is_ religious. It basically goes along the lines of “only God can destroy the world, so nothing man does can.” They essentially believe that man is incapable of causing catastrophic damage to Earth because they won’t be allowed to. “God made” a **lot** of things humans have proven able to destroy. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/86 "2012-05-24T22:14:30Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > Here again if evidence against books like The Bell Curve was compelling it would not be dangerous in many environments to agree publicly. If the environment were that heavy, _The Bell Curve_ would not be so easy to find in bookstores and public libraries. ---
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/87 "2012-05-24T22:32:21Z")
[Relevant](http://pics.kuvaton.com/kuvei/best_birthday_prank_ever.gif). ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/88 "2012-05-24T22:48:32Z")
Sooo many logical falacies.:rolleyes: Most people do not neatly allign along Conservative or Liberal idealogy. And in the case of Andrew Schlafly, being awesome at math or law doesn’t preclude you from anti-gay prejudice or anti-abortion beliefs. And not to pick on **Der Trihs** , but he can certainly be intractable in his leftish beliefs regardless of any facts or evidence to the contrary. The OP (or the book referenced therein) is a clear example of declaring your enemy to be fundamentally “different” as to make it easier to discredit their beliefs as an inherent and fundamental flaw. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/89 "2012-05-24T22:49:07Z")
> [@Randvek](#): > > Ah, but a lot of the opposition to global warming _is_ religious. It basically goes along the lines of “only God can destroy the world, so nothing man does can.” They essentially believe that man is incapable of causing catastrophic damage to Earth because they won’t be allowed to. Global warming is hardly going to destroy the earth. And the religious can hardly claim we can’t create floods - we do it intentionally when we build dams and unintentionally when those dams break. But in any case, the prospect of nuclear war should have made it clear that we are quite capable of destroying the world for all intents and purposes. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/90 "2012-05-24T22:54:00Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > But in any case, the prospect of nuclear war should have made it clear that we are quite capable of destroying the world for all intents and purposes. Many Fundamentalists associate a nuclear war with the second coming of Christ. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/91 "2012-05-24T23:24:10Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > Many Fundamentalists associate a nuclear war with the second coming of Christ. :eek: Exactly. Whatever anyone thinks of the sensibleness or consistency of such a position, the simple fact is that religious groups, particularly towards the fundie side, tend to be dismissive of the threat of GW, or deny the A in AGW. I have two theories for why this might be the case: 1. As you imply, some would actually welcome the end of days 2. The modern Creationist account has it that for several periods the earth went into comedy fast-forward. Even the worst GW projections are a mosquito bite compared to such changes. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/92 "2012-05-24T23:48:57Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > Many Fundamentalists associate a nuclear war with the second coming of Christ. :eek: JESUS RIDING BOMB AND WAVING STETSON: **Yeeeeeehaaaaaawwwww!** ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/93 "2012-05-24T23:51:09Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > The OP (or the book referenced therein) is a clear example of declaring your enemy to be fundamentally “different” as to make it easier to discredit their beliefs as an inherent and fundamental flaw. … > [@Chris Mooney](#): > > Let’s be clear: This is not a claim about intelligence. Nor am I saying that conservatives are somehow worse people than liberals; the groups are just different. Liberals have their own weaknesses grounded in psychology, and conservatives are very aware of this. (Many of the arguments in this book could be inverted and repackaged into a book called The Democratic Brain—with a Spock-like caricature of President Obama on the cover.) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2012, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/94 "2012-05-24T23:52:36Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > Sooo many logical falacies.:rolleyes: [Pick.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy) ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/95 "2012-05-25T00:20:29Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > JESUS RIDING BOMB AND WAVING STETSON: **Yeeeeeehaaaaaawwwww!** Wing Attack, Prayer R. The nuclear war thing might be a bit extreme. Now not caring about global warming since we are near the end days (and have been for almost 2,000 years) is more mainstream. But saying trashing the earth is okay is different from saying we can’t - which is the point of this subthread. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/96 "2012-05-25T13:42:48Z")
> [@Deegeea](#): > > That said, it is still true that the general way of convincing for the right in current USA politics depends more on appeal to beliefs, and the general way of convincing for the left depends more on appeal to facts. I would say this is because the dividing line has moved right, so the current left is more centrist/neutral, so the facts are currently more on the side of the left. At times in the past, this has been less the case, hence the (above mentioned) examples of 60s era left wing refusal to acknowledge fact. Wait, you seem to be implying that reality-fighting fact-substitution is an inherent characteristic of fringe-thinking a such. And that’s not true. They don’t come no fringier than Libertarians – but, IME, while they can sometimes come off as crazy/obsessive in the way they read the implications of the facts or interpret the facts, they do **not** fight the facts; correct them and they stand corrected. (And take the rant in a different direction, perhaps.) Generally, I mean. I’ve encountered exceptions, of course, but I don’t see them as typical of the movement, the way persistent reality-denial **is** typical and characteristic of the religious/cultural right, etc. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/97 "2012-05-25T14:54:31Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [Pick.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy) **Fallacy of accident or sweeping generalization** All conservatives are not Tea Party Christian conservative gun toting nutjobs. The terms Right Wing, Republican and Conservative seems to be used pretty interchangeably as if they are all one monolithic entity. **Begging the question** “What is wrong with Republicans that they don’t agree with Liberals?” **Straw man** The assumption that everyone thought all right leaning people are stupid in the first place. **Non sequitor** Just because Chriss Mooney writes about science and the book “The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science – and Reality” has “science” in the title, that doesn’t make him a scientist or the book a peer reviewed scientific study (as opposed to a political oppinion piece). **Argument by innuendo** “Let’s be clear: This is not a claim about intelligence. Nor am I saying that conservatives are somehow worse people than liberals; the groups are just different…” ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/98 "2012-05-25T15:42:36Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > **Fallacy of accident or sweeping generalization** > All conservatives are not Tea Party Christian conservative gun toting nutjobs. The terms Right Wing, Republican and Conservative seems to be used pretty interchangeably as if they are all one monolithic entity. > > “What is wrong with Republicans that they don’t agree with Liberals?” A problem more with the OP than the writer of the books > [@msmith537](#): > > **Straw man** > The assumption that everyone thought all right leaning people are stupid in the first place. You are missing the point of the book. > [@msmith537](#): > > **Non sequitor** > Just because Chriss Mooney writes about science and the book “The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science – and Reality” has “science” in the title, that doesn’t make him a scientist or the book a peer reviewed scientific study (as opposed to a political oppinion piece). Besides the typical pandering to creationism by the Republicans, the fact remains that they are ignoring science with the global warming issue and doing now more harm than just pandering, and in this case virtually all republicans congress critters are on record of being in the pockets of the fossil fuel industry and do not care that the science tells a different history. [http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/02/santorum-goes-biblical-with-climate-change-denial.php](http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/02/santorum-goes-biblical-with-climate-change-denial.php) [http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2011/07/22/dangerously-unprepared-congressional-budget-cuts-are-leaving-americans-vulnerable-to-climate-extremes/](http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2011/07/22/dangerously-unprepared-congressional-budget-cuts-are-leaving-americans-vulnerable-to-climate-extremes/) > [@msmith537](#): > > **Argument by innuendo** > “Let’s be clear: This is not a claim about intelligence. Nor am I saying that conservatives are somehow worse people than liberals; the groups are just different…” And once again missing the point, the writer of the books does mention many times that overall Republicans are smart, the problem is that they use their intelligence to enhance points that in reality have very little support, and for that we have to blame the sources that they use. [http://climatecrocks.com/2009/08/03/creepy-at-the-epa/](http://climatecrocks.com/2009/08/03/creepy-at-the-epa/) ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/99 "2012-05-25T16:02:15Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Wait, you seem to be implying that reality-fighting fact-substitution is an inherent characteristic of fringe-thinking a such. And that’s not true. They don’t come no fringier than Libertarians – but, IME, while they can sometimes come off as crazy/obsessive in the way they read the implications of the facts or interpret the facts, they do **not** fight the facts; correct them and they stand corrected. (And take the rant in a different direction, perhaps.) Generally, I mean. I’ve encountered exceptions, of course, but I don’t see them as typical of the movement, the way persistent reality-denial **is** typical and characteristic of the religious/cultural right, etc. I will have to disagree here regarding global warming, the Heartland Institute is a libertarian think tank and it is one of the outfits that organizes denial information to be used by (virtually all) Republican politicians. Heartland has never corrected their misleading information no matter how many times it has been debunked. > **[DenialGate Highlights Heartland's Selective NIPCC Science](https://skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=1295)** > > DenialGate - the leaked internal documents from the climate science denying think tank Heartland Institute - has given us a small glimpse into the operations of the climate denial movement.  Funds from a few wealthy individuals and corporations are... If it had not been for the very stupid recent “global warming proponents are like mass murderers” ad campaign it is very clear that most of the libertarian supporters of Heartland would still be proud of their past efforts. (Come to think of it, they still are, just not with the recent ad campaign) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [May 25, 2012, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856/100 "2012-05-25T16:34:38Z")
> [@msmith537](#): > > **Fallacy of accident or sweeping generalization** > All conservatives are not Tea Party Christian conservative gun toting nutjobs. The terms Right Wing, Republican and Conservative seems to be used pretty interchangeably as if they are all one monolithic entity. “Republican” implies no ideology, but aren’t “Right Wing” and “Conservative” more or less synonymous? I am aware of the definitional/classificatory problem you are pointing out – see my posts upthread, nos. 22 & 33. I am aware that the GOP, or the “conservative side” of the American aisle generally, includes several distinct groups (any one of which, some might dispute classifying as “conservative”): Paleocons, neocons, theocons, bizcons, libertarians, “Main Street Republicans,” even white nationalists. . . and they don’t always see eye-to-eye. But most of those politically engaged have been working together in a single alliance and following a “No Enemies to the Right” strategy since the 1970s, and I suspect that experience might have . . . taught them to think like each other, to some extent, more so than they are fully conscious of; and the opinions of the politically engaged will have an effect on the thinking of the less-engaged like-minded masses. > [@msmith537](#): > > **Begging the question** > “What is wrong with Republicans that they don’t agree with Liberals?” No, the question is, "What is up with [not nessarily “wrong with”] conservatives that they don’t agree with **facts** and **science?"** See post #16. Those are errors. Do you seriously want to **defend** any of those errors as factual? (Please read each **very carefully** before you try. E.g., WRT “Economics,” which is always controversial, the RW belief does includes an indisputable error of fact to the effect that “most economists concur with this assessment”.) > [@msmith537](#): > > **Straw man** > The assumption that everyone thought all right leaning people are stupid in the first place. :rolleyes: **That** was never even **assumed,** it’s just a meme any liberal, or moderate/centrist, can’t avoid considering nowadays for obvious reasons, see post #16; certainly Mooney could not avoid confronting it. > [@msmith537](#): > > [ **Non sequitor** > Just because Chriss Mooney writes about science and the book “The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science – and Reality” has “science” in the title, that doesn’t make him a scientist or the book a peer reviewed scientific study (as opposed to a political oppinion piece). Nor is [Mooney](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Mooney_(journalist)) pretending to be a scientist; he is merely a journalist of science. That does not make him unqualified to write it. He was qualified to write his 2005 book, [_The Republican War on Science,_](http://www.amazon.com/The-Republican-Science-Chris-Mooney/dp/B000WCNU44/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1337963233&sr=1-1) and his 2009 book, [url=]_Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens Our Future._ > [@msmith537](#): > > **Argument by innuendo** > “Let’s be clear: This is not a claim about intelligence. Nor am I saying that conservatives are somehow worse people than liberals; the groups are just different…” Waitaminnit, now, how should Mooney **not** have said that?! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rws-are-not-stupid-its-much-worse-than-that/622856.md?page=6)