Why Are Scientists Overwhelmingly on The Left?

I have criticized the left many times on this site including in prior conversations with you, and in my last reply to you I clarified that no one is arguing the left is perfect. You are having a whole conversation in your head.

This conversation is about whether both sides are equal. I’m explaining why they are not. Saying one side is worse than the other does not = the other side is perfect.

The 2016 example would compare except for one huge problem… not one prominent voice on the left is claiming Russia messed with the vote tallies. This is is nothing more than misunderstandings of ignorant people who don’t follow politics closely and only read headlines. If any prominent Democrat or any prominent mainstream news host made this claim they would be immediately called out by the rest of their colleagues. That’s not remotely the case in the right.

Regarding masking in schools, you need to take your issue up with the CDC and the FDA. Again, this is not a comparable example. Even if they are wrong about this, we’re talking about whether both sides are equal in their disregard for inconvenient realities. You cannot seriously claim someone who is listening to the CDC is on par with someone who gets their vaccine information from Facebook.

As far as the outdoor masking mandate, do you have any current examples of this other than one governor in one state?

The life experience I was referring to was that of black people who grow up in black neighborhoods. The reason I brought that up was to emphasize that unlike you or I, their positions on these highly charged issues isn’t a product of googling statistics on their phone or computer. Black people don’t put exclamation points on videos of police violence because it suits their political ideology, they do it because it is what they have been telling us is happening in their neighborhoods for decades. That doesn’t mean they are right and everyone else wrong, it’s just a very different thing than claiming the entire scientific industry is in on a hoax because you read it somewhere on Brietbart. 

Do you have that much trouble understanding the left that you cannot find any other way to explain its prevalence other than through emotional attachment?

My political beliefs aren’t based on gratitude or trauma. I have no emotional vestment in the Democratic Party or the left nor do I regard it at all within my sense of identity. I align more with the left because the left is more aligned with reality. Show me I’m wrong and I will change my position. Is that simple.

The counter argument will always be that ~300 deaths out of 20 million kids is too much of a risk to allow 20 million kids to run around unmasked.

If 20 million masks can save 10 kids a year, then it's worth it!

Covid safetyism. However I don’t think the average person is aware of the statistics on just how little the virus effects children. Honestly we got extremely lucky with this one, a super flu probably would’ve ripped through children 

The only think I see coming out of this conversation is evidence that they ARE the same, that irrationality, partisan blindness, and wishful thinking predominates among human beings of all stripes

I also pointed out some deep flaws in the thinking of the party of science, such as the belief that anyone who has an opposite opinion needs to be censored, or that a burly, hairy, deep voiced, tall human being with a penis and testicles can be a woman.

I mean, prominent Democrats spent years proclaiming that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with Russia when they knew in reality that this did not happen

It's the same because both of those things are wrong. I don't really care where the source of the misinformation comes from, the result is the same. The CDC, for what it's worth, would tell you never to eat a medium rare steak. Their job is to be incredibly over cautious.

Come on, now. We all have some irrationality in us. Don't pretend you aren't tribalistic, we all are. If it helps, we can talk about this privately. I really am asking the question in good faith. Trying to conclusively determine the origin of political affiliation is a subject I've been trying to crack for over a year now

A new study finds no serious evidence of a liberal (or conservative) bias with respect to replicability, quality or impact of research

This is a classic fallacy of composition. Just because you can identify flaws in both sides that are of the same category doesn’t make both sides the same, and if that’s how you insist on defining “the same” then it’s a useless term. That’s like arguing that the candy bar thief and the bank robber are the same because they both steal.

Again, none of your examples are comparable. None of them are driving left wing politics, and none of them would be defended any prominent left wing politician or left wing media figure. That is not even close to being the case regarding the examples I gave.

Censorship has absolutely nothing to do with science, and both issues here are just flat out caricatures. The left isn’t trying to censor “opposing viewpoints”, it’s trying to censor speech that leads to violence. Unfortunately, that type of speech is becoming prominent on the right. But again, nothing to do with science.

Forget the rest of the evidence, those three facts alone meet any reasonable definition of collusion. Republicans love to pretend there was no collision by relying on a cartoonish interpretation whereby the only sufficient evidence would be a recording of Trump sitting down with Putin taking direct orders. 

So in your view, following the CDC’s guidelines in the middle of a pandemic is the same as getting your health advice Tucker Carlson. Ok bro.

Never said I was perfect either, but I can tell you what matters to me and what my core principals are about. I despise tribalism and strive to rid myself of it anywhere I find it. I do that by focusing on logic first and building everything on top of that.

I have no idea what Tucker Carlson has said about outdoor mask mandates or forcing toddlers and small children to wear masks for eight hours a day, but if he is against those policies and the CDC is for them then yeah his advice would be better because those policies are objectively wrong. I gave you two really short articles that absolutely blow any arguments for them out of the water and you haven't said a single thing against them. Recall that majorities of democrats, the party of science, support both of those things

I’ve always wondered that. 

your study is only about whether political biases change results.

A new study finds no serious evidence of a liberal (or conservative) bias with respect to replicability, quality or impact of research

You're just asserting they aren't comparable lol. Why not? We've both given cases where there is an objective reality and one party seems to be on the wrong side of it. The "difference" just comes from how an individual values certain things. 

The poll said nothing about violence, it talked about "misinformation" which....can mean anything.

It's absolutely wild to me that you can attribute political violence as coming exclusively or overwhelmingly from the right after a half decade of antifa violence against Trump supporters and the deadliest wave of riots in half a century last summer. No group is perfect--people are people.

Also, censorship has EVERYTHING to do with science. The scientific method REQUIRES challenge and dissent, no group that thinks people need to stfu and listen to what they are told can claim the mantle of science lol

Dude even Mueller said there was no collusion lol

but if he is against those policies and the CDC is for them then yeah his advice would be better because those policies are objectively wrong. I gave you two really short articles that absolutely blow any arguments for them out of the water and you haven't said a single thing against them.

What are your core principles? What is your vision for America?

I’ve already explained this, but I’ll try it another way… all of your criticisms of the left are based on a right wingers point of view. You keep asserting issues that are no where to be found on any prominent left wing news outlet and no where to be found in any significant left wing effort regarding policy. These are issues that the right wing talks about day in and day out only because they need something, anything, to slander the other side in order to stay formidable politically.

The best example you’ve came up with in this entire conversation are police shootings. Yet the disparity you’re pointing to is about statistics, which both sides get wrong because almost no one pays attention to statistics on eitger side, so your comparison is already problematic.

Ok, let me clarify my statement. The left generally supports censoring speech that is a threat to public safety. It doesn’t have to be someone throwing fists.

No one on the left gives a cramp crap about Antifa and the left overwhelming disproves of the violence we saw at the summer rallies last year, but like everyone else on the right you just tie it to “the left” and then claim the left is for violence.

Because I’m not interested in being dragged down the rabbit hole of a debate that neither of us knows anything about. You keep saying that the science on masking shows it doesn’t work. That’s really funny because doctors and scientists seem to overwhelmingly disagree with you. The CDC and the FDA disagree with you

My first question to you is why do you believe the authors of your articles know better than them?

Also, do you think I should face legal consequences for disagreeing with the CDC on masking toddlers?

Both sides are chalk full of irrationality and it’s really funny how you won’t admit that.

Well yeah, which is why if it's authoritative consensus, it aint science. Every actual scientist knows this.

Hypothetical scenario; You are having serious chest pains. You go to 10 doctors to get looked at. 9 of them tell you that you need surgery. 1 of them tells you it’s not serious and prescribes you medication.

Question: What do you think is most reasonable to believe?