31st August 2011
Jonah Goldberg points out some inconvenient truth.
Why does the Left get to pick which issues are the benchmarks for “science”? Why can’t the measure of being pro-science be the question of heritability of intelligence? Or the existence of fetal pain? Or the distribution of cognitive abilities among the sexes at the extreme right tail of the bell curve? Or if that’s too upsetting, how about dividing the line between those who are pro- and anti-science along the lines of support for geoengineering? Or — coming soon — the role cosmic rays play in cloud formation? Why not make it about support for nuclear power? Or Yucca Mountain? Why not deride the idiots who oppose genetically modified crops, even when they might prevent blindness in children?
The point is that the Left considers itself the undisputed champion of “science,” but there are scads of issues where they take un-scientific points of view.
And they feel free to ignore it totally when it doesn’t fit the Narrative, e.g. the undeniable scientific fact that homosexuality is abnormal.