Who's More Pro-Sciencea Republicans Or Democrats? - Neil Degrasse Tyson

Who's More Pro-Sciencea Republicans Or Democrats? - Neil Degrasse T...

Here is an interesting way in which Neil deGrasse Tyson frames pro-science. He supports his claim with examples of science funding trends. 

Views: 181

Replies to This Discussion

That may have been true in 2009, but today the Republicans are overtly anti-scientific as far as I can see, partly because of their Climate Change denial. The are decreasing science funding now.

Yes, that is quite correct. Tyson made the statement that no Republican wants to be poor, and I suspect their desire for stuff requires them to know a lot about things beyond a given belief system based on goat herder mentality. When beliefs in god and holy scriptures get in the way of profits, will they be so interested in their "family values"? Will they keep the war against women going if it costs them money income? Probably! Oh well, another light at the end of the tunnel goes dark. 

I'd argue that Clinton had a Republican Congress while Bush had a Democratic congress and that's why more money was spent on science under Bush than Clinton. I also consider Bush's manipulation (deletion and changes) of raw scientific data related to climate change along with killing Hansen's ability to report climate change facts as more important than Tyson says by mentioning the environment.

I should think the answer is more than obvious.  During one of the presidential debates by the GOP clown parade in 2008, a moderator asked if the candidates believed in evolution.  One by one Santorum, Gingrich, et al. answered no.  When it came to McCain, he fudged and said yes, but quickly added that when he witnessed the beauty of a sunset, &c....the implication being he believed God is compatible with evolution.  It is not. I do not now remember if this question was asked of Democratic candidates, but I should imagine the answers would be more along the lines of McCain's.  If we ever have a candidate for the top job who is openly atheist, I guarantee you it will NOT be a Republican.

How did the economic theory between the two parties get mingled with literalistic biblical interpretations in the Republican party. If it weren't for that the R's wouldn't have any constituents. It's a broken party.

When I clicked on your link, it said the video was no longer available, but I found it at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7Q8UvJ1wvk

Spud, happily you found a new source to watch the film. What did you think of Tyson's comment? I like the way he uses data to inform his reasoning. He deals with reality, not what we think is happening. When one does that, there is a higher probability of getting from where we are to where we want to be. 

I think the fundamentalist religions will fail for that very reason. Quality of life goes down when under the influence of dogma. Just look at the Golden Age of Islam and the great scientific advances made during that era and the sudden collapse with the take over of fundamentalists. Their Golden Age encouraged diversity, including all religions and diversity of thought. 

Just look at the Golden Age of Egypt, a period of scientific development, with development of the Arabic numeral use. Because they conceived of "0" and thus had access to negative numbers, and the system supported mathematical function +-×÷∑%. One couldn't do that with Roman numerals. 

Christianity, like Islam before it: back to the dark ages

"Christians today threaten to send us back into the dark ages by rejecting and even actively fighting against naturalistic science, like what happened with Islam from the 12th Century and onward, after a period of huge leaps in scientific research with Baghdad as the intellectual centre of the world."

"Revelaton replaced investigation!"

~ Neil deGrasse Tyson

I like almost everything Tyson says, including this topic.  The Atheists here have some good points also, so, as usual, I haven't formed a firm opinion on the subject yet.  For quite a few years now, I've voted for the Libertarian candidates because they seem to take the best ideas of Democrats and Republicans, and reject the worst.  They make sense to my way of thinking.

I loved Tyson's thoughts on the Golden Age of Islam, and how Christianity is trying for the same downfall Islam experienced.  I'd forgotten the Golden Age of Egypt comments.  Thanks for reminding me.  Great stuff.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service