Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Creationism Wins Votes - For Both Parties

Glass Houses
The media and the Democrats (wait, that's redundant) are out to shame socially conservative Republicans regarding their belief systems, namely their beliefs in God and the nature of the universe God created (along with our existence).  

Now, I have very little care for that stuff in the media or from my candidates but I have resigned myself that there are a lot of kooky beliefs out there from all types and from all parts of the  spectrum, and that the electorate wants to have their own beliefs reinforced.   Those who would make fun of or believe themselves to be superior to Christians are often the same idiots who pray to crystals, "religiously" read the horoscopes, reject vaccinations, believe in ESP and have highly contradictory belief systems of their own.  Sometimes I just want to step on a crack and break their mother's back.

Thus, I find this article via REALCLEARSCIENCE.COM to be particularly interesting.

Creationism Wins Votes - For Both Parties
 By Hank Campbell | August 26th 2011 
'Creationism' is a confusing term.  In science, militant atheists will intentionally call all religious people 'creationists' and then complain creationists are anti-science, even about the religious people who are not anti-science at all.   'Young Earth' creationists think we were created in whole form 6,000 or so years ago and believe paleontology and biology are some test of faith but commingling the terms is intellectually dishonest.   Politics makes even otherwise smart scientists do bad things.

It's the same scam progressive militants pulled regarding 'stem cell research'.   No Republican had objected to 40 years of 'stem cell research' but when Bush restricted federal funding of human embryonic stem cell research to existing lines, Republicans were supposedly 'against stem cell research'.  Generally, when a scientist uses a political term, you need to be extra-skeptical about how they are framing their data.   With political pundits we already do that.

I don't actually know any young Earth creationists or anti-science religious people, though I know a lot of religious people.  I know anti-science religious people are out there, it may just be the circles I run in(1).  I can go to Seattle and find more anti-science, anti-religious people (25% of kids in one Seattle school have parents who refuse to get them vaccines) than I can find anti-science religious people in Mobile.

Apparently a lot of anti-science people are out there - if you frame the question the right way.  But they are Democrats too.   A recent Fox News article highlighted some comments by Texas Governor Rick Perry where he said evolution has 'some gaps in it' - a technically true statement but we all know what he was getting at; religion was the secret sauce and the science was invented to try and have an alternative view.  Gallup figures in that same article noted only 8% of Republicans believe evolution was solely science - no God at any point, i.e., atheists.  But only 16% of people overall believe that, which means a whole boatload of Democrats believe it too.

Now, I have no problem at all with belief.  Evolution tells us how we got where we are today but no credible biologist says he or she can yet tell us about the spark of life, its origin.   If you think you can find that answer, an entrepreneur wants to fund your research and will give you a cool $2 million to do so.   That's right, you can be free of pesky government rules and just answer the question once and for all.

But I am betting President Obama is not going into the Bible Belt and proclaiming his atheism and saying science rules and religion is bunk - that's what Gallup poll editor-in-chief Frank Newport wants to establish as the standard for not being anti-science...for a Republican, anyway.   Progressives who have never voted for anyone but a Democrat will rationalize that and claim Obama is secretly an atheist.  Here is Bill Maher with that intellectual placebo:

Republicans are under criticism from some in science because they take the middle road - GOP contender Jon Huntsman tweeted, in response to Perry's evolution statement, “To be clear I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy”.

I look forward to calls from the science community to withhold votes from Democrats who do not also proclaim their atheism.


(1) Most famous demonstrated by New Yorker film critic Pauline Kael, who said, after Nixon's 1972 landslide victory in the presidential election, "I don't know how Nixon won. No one I know voted for him."

1 comment:

  1. Don’t make the media’s political inclination sound like a conspiracy. It is just business. Which direction a media source leans is dictated by what entertains their specific audience. Since our media is paid by advertisers, attracting a bigger audience will send more profit their way. The audience wants reassurance and doesn’t shop around for the best opinion. This is capitalism at its best.

    If Joe Public likes watching or listening to stories about either rich people or poor people being evil or stupid, the media will emphasize that lean. The media source doesn’t have incentive to do anything else. Joe Public generally picks a side he can relate to and stays with it. The more stories about his particular ”bad guys” shown on a specific media source, the more Joe Public will watch it as opposed to another media source. From then on, bumper sticker morality and cliffhanger news promos fits his busy life. Afterwards, Joe Public wants to buy books or movies confirming how evil his “bad guy” is. But most of all, he wants to know he is right.

    Fair and unbiased news is a fairy tale.