Most people don’t know he’s a fuckwit. And some people who do know are stupid themselves. And some people who do know are crazy themselves. And some people who do know like that he’s, “Stickin’ it to the Libtards!”
If you’re okay trusting your brain to a man who went through medical school and dismissed evolution because it conflicts with some fables he heard as a child, well it’s your brain.
That’s no my problem. That’s something you made up because you’re fumbling around trying to justify fawning over a dipshit that thinks there was a global food.
Someone who has been through medical school has no defense for not being knowledgeable about biology. He willfully ignores facts when he doesn’t like them. Putting someone like that in power is profoundly stupid.
Staying on message is a skill. Knowing that the sky isn’t a stone dome that has pinpricks of light in it, isn’t a high bar to ask of someone.
It’s a pithy idiom. I don’t doubt that Carson is smart, at least a little, in a narrow field. That doesn’t mean he should be trusted with nuclear weapons. He’s loony as a fuck.
Nonsense. He’s overseen it fine by any measure. You’re ideologically devoted to finding flaw, so you’re trumping up background noise as a symphony of incompetence.
People are smart in different ways. Carson has a pie slice of intelligence that allows him to function as a surgeon. The rest of the pizza is full of bronze-age utter horseshit, and the arrogant delusion necessary to ignore obvious facts.
He’s also probably not sure that the world is 6,000 years old.
Evolution is a special case because it cannot be disproved in an experiment. Carson’s job is more intimately acquainted with the scientific method than a politician’s. I would agree that a person with a scientific background should give more credence to scientific consensus, but I don’t consider the unwillingness to do so a sign of bad thinking. Unlike say, thinking that the laws of supply and demand can be repealed by legislation, something which liberals try to do every day while proclaiming loudly that they respect science.
Is there a field narrower than politics? Actual actors need more skills.
A pie slice of intelligence that allows you to be a brain surgeon? Interesting idea. I wonder how well attacking his intelligence will fly in a campaign. Especially given that it’s not unusual for us to elect evolution-deniers President.
While it may be frustrating, I know a lot of intelligent people who believe that. Religion is a weird thing, it makes people divide their brains up. The rational side would never allow them to believe something that would have actual consequences, but for things that do not have any import on their lives or the lives of those entrusted to them, believing certain things works for them. Ben Carson never killed a patient because he believed the world was 6000 years old, nor did his belief in the afterlife make him discount life any less. Heck, if anything, those that don’t believe in an afterlife seem to consider life less precious than those who do.
Let’s start with minimum wage. The administration actually disputed the CBO’s assessment and said that job loss due to a higher minimum wage would be ZERO. By your own logic, that should disqualify everyone in that administration on the economics side from well, being in that administration.
Good politicians need some skills. Chucklefucks like the current stars on the right don’t need much of anything, other than a spleen to vent.
To be a brain surgeon you need a strong memory, good hands, and an iron will. You can’t be stupid, but you sure as fuck can be an idiot.
No, I’m guessing he didn’t. However, if he decides that biblical prophecy needs him to nuke the Levant, he is obviously immune to facts and reasoned arguments to dissuade him.
That’s horseshit. All an atheist has is this world. Theists think this is dress rehearsal for the real show.
500k is a possible projection. The CBO granted that it might be very slight. We just added 320k jobs So the amount is fairly small, and unsure in any case.
“Our view is that… zero is a perfectly reasonable estimate of the impact of the minimum wage on employment,” Furman said
The CBO recognizes that it could be more or less. But this is an administration that argued that the stimulus created or saves millions of jobs, not because such was actually observed, but because the economic models said it must be so. When the economic models predicted job loss from a minimum wage increase, they invented new economic theory on the spot. Pretty incredible.
Now granted, the Democrats are right on the merits of minimum wage. 16.5 million people helped vs. 500,000 hurt isn’t a bad deal. But denying tradeoffs is just dishonest. There is no free lunch. I mean, they could just be lying. Apparently lying about science is okay, whereas actually disbelieving something that the scientific consensus says is disqualifying.
Well, to be totally fair, not everyone believes every tenet of the religion they belong to*, so that’s a pretty weak cite for that claim. But he does appear to be a creationist, which is rather stunning. That is, he doesn’t “believe” in evolution by natural selection, thinking there must be some diving intervention. It should be noted, however, that he is hardly alone in holding those view in the US-- he is in the majority.
*And he was raised in that religion, so it’s not like he chose to join as an adult.
Plus people of faith tend to divide their brains up. My mother-in-law believes exactly as Carson does, and she has a masters in biochemistry. She wouldn’t even have her Associate’s if she got every question wrong on evolution. She knows evolution, and I’m sure Carson knows evolution, or else he wouldn’t have gotten his degrees either. I couldn’t have passed high school biology without understanding it.
If there was actually a problem here, Carson would never have become a neurosurgeon.
It is a basic tenet of economics that increasing the price of something reduces demand. It’s true that other factors could drown out the relatively small effects of a modest minimum wage increase, but the theory is sound. To deny the laws of supply and demand is pure quackery.
Keynesianism, which is much less solid than the Law of Supply and Demand, the administration has regarded as undeniably reliable science. Since they increased federal spending, it MUST have grown the economy and increased employment, even though such an effect was not observed, and even though their own models showing what would happen without a stimulus matched nearly exactly what happened with a stimulus. THeir ad hoc hypothesis: “Things were worse than we thought.”
At least on economics, this administration is simply not serious. And that is a field of study that has far more impact on governance than how the Earth came to be.
They are listening to the experts that tell them what they want to hear. The experts Congress actually hired so that politicians would have a harder time lying about the effects of their policies, they didn’t like them so much.
When Ben Carson denies the reality of a basic tenet of economics, let me know.
As I said, they have to be pessimistic. And you were wrong. Horribly so, and you incorrectly demonized the administration based on your ignorance of the issue.
He thinks a flat tax is a good idea, is that close enough?
Ben Carson “I’m so smart I say, and believe in, stupid things on purpose!”
Too long for a bumper sticker . . . but it’s got potential as a campaign slogan.
False. And many experiments (like this one, most notably), have lent considerable data in support of evolution.
Which makes it all the more egregious that he discounts it.
How on earth not?
Nope.
Belief in evolution may not hurt Carson’s ability to do surgery. But it shows a flaw in his ability to think critically.
Appeal to authority – the problem with his critical thinking is exacerbated by his medical training. He should know better – he should be held to a much higher standard than idiots like Louie Gohmert.
Carson seems unable to challenge idiotic thinking about religion and science, even if he might accept certain aspects of science that don’t challenge his religious beliefs. I certainly couldn’t support someone who rejects science for something as fundamental to the field as evolution.
I think part of the problem here is the tendency to regard intelligence and stupidity as mutually exclusive properties. I’ve always said you can possess both. There are, in fact, levels of stupidity that require true genius to achieve.
Doctor Carson has an inspiring back story but I’d certainly never vote for him because of what he believes. The fact that a smart person can believe a few stupid things doesn’t make him stupid but neither does it render the stupid things he believes any less the stupid for him believing them.
Is that sort of like how liberals were adamant that Obamacare would bend the cost curve downward even though a basic understanding of economics would lead one to understand how asinine an assumption that was?