Gravity is also "just a theory." Scientific theories require a lot of evidence, and all 3 of those have all of the evidence pointing towards them being true.
And yes, people realize that there is a two party issue. It's actually a major factor as to why Trump won because people are sick of the establishment which don't represent the people themselves.
Gravity is also "just a theory." Scientific theories require a lot of evidence, and all 3 of those have all of the evidence pointing towards them being true.
There is no evidence that gravity is wrong or that there is something else besides gravity which causes matter to pull each other closer together, so believing in something else is completely irrational, and even dangerous in certain circumstances. Climate change has basically been proven to be happening, and if we do nothing about it then lots of destruction and death will occur. People who deny climate change are actually not only irrational, but they're also dangerous since having a large group of people deny climate change makes it harder to put in policies what will stop it or lessen its impact, especially when a lot of those climate change deniers are in the U.S. government and are actually trying to push policies that will make climate change happen even faster.
There's a very simple way to stop it all, let me put you on game. Don't vote.
As I was saying before we are divided as a country so we can never make any real change to it. We are too busy name calling and trying to be the greatest of our two dominant tribes.
If we don't vote do you really think all that money will still be raining in? Who do you think controls who at that point? Who truly has all of the power in the US. It all boils down to votes.
There is no evidence that gravity is wrong or that there is something else besides gravity which causes matter to pull each other closer together, so believing in something else is completely irrational, and even dangerous in certain circumstances.
If it is so irrational to believe otherwise then why is it a theory. Just stop. You sound dumb.
Climate change has basically been proven to be happening, and if we do nothing about it then lots of destruction and death will occur. People who deny climate change are actually not only irrational, but they're also dangerous since having a large group of people deny climate change makes it harder to put in policies what will stop it or lessen its impact, especially when a lot of those climate change deniers are in the U.S. government and are actually trying to push policies that will make climate change happen even faster.
As I was saying before we are divided as a country so we can never make any real change to it. We are too busy name calling and trying to be the greatest of our two dominant tribes.
If we don't vote do you really think all that money will still be raining in? Who do you think controls who at that point? Who truly has all of the power in the US. It all boils down to votes.
Really? We have been having the lowest voter turnout in years. That is the exact reason why corporate politicians are in the government.
Voting for candidates to replace them and that would represent the interests of their constituents rather than corporations is the actual answer.
It's already working slowly but surely for the Democratic party. The people are primarying the Democratic establishment and because of that there is a paradigm shift. The politicians who were against medicare for all are now for the proposition.
Yeah this is just one "big-ass opinion" that 99% of climate scientists, people who specialize in studying the climate, happen to agree with... The fact that the record for the hottest temperature just so happens to continuously increase year after year is just one big coincidence...
Your argument is very confused and close-minded. You're arguing with someone who knows the difference and is telling you that just because something is a theory with overwhelming evidence supporting it, it is deniable until it becomes law.
The way you would have it, all theories are fact and anyone who denies them are big 'uge dummies.
Yeah this is just one "big-ass opinion" that 99% of climate scientists, people who specialize in studying the climate, happen to agree with... The fact that the record for the hottest temperature just so happens to continuously increase year after year is just one big coincidence...
And yet, it's still a theory...? Show me the absolute proof that sets this simple theory over the top and stops explaining why these events are happening and can actually predict events. Because that is when it becomes undeniable law.
I think you need to watch the video you linked me. A theory is not FACT. A theory has overwhelming evidence, however that does not make it fact. It does not make it irrational to explore ideas because that is how theories are formed in the very first place.
In your case you're arguing the theory of gravity is undeniable and irrational to disagree with... Well which one? There are several and have been several for many decades and centuries. How does our current model of gravity(taught in schools) explain dark matter? It doesn't. In the face of dark matter it is utterly garbage and worthless. Yet, are we not supposed to look further into gravity simply because there is a theory on it and it would be irrational to do any further research.
You are trying to go against the very fundamental reason science exists by trying to designate who can agree and disagree with scientific theory. The whole point of science is to disagree and prove it with undeniable evidence. There are very few things humans know to be undeniable.
Christ, sorry for correcting you. Talk about blowing up.
I actually only stopped reading because the first thing you said was wrong and denying/willfully overlooking an infamous piece of propaganda immediately showed you didn't quite know what you were talking about. We were talking about the specific stereotypes that this film proudly tried to indoctrinate into people it's right-wing appeal...and questioning why such films portray intelligence like this as it clearly has a lot of bearing on real life values too.
How does a single right wing movie disprove the fact that Hollywood is liberal? You've reduce the argument to a single film, when Hollywood in a billion dollar industry, that produces hundreds, upon hundreds, upon hundreds of films, not to mention, that Hollywood in itself is not merely and industry, but a culture in itself. There's a class system exclusive to Hollywood that does not exist anywhere in the U.S.
We're talking about stereotypes right? We can agree that stereotypes are a general tendency placed on a populous or a given categorical group; w/ some stereotypes being more true than others? Tell me how this one right wing movie which , no longer make the general tendency of Hollywood left leaning? Are you aware of the concept of empiricism? Averages? Mediums? Do you not know what an outlier is? Have you ever taken a ****ing math class? A single class? It doesn't even have to be statistics; basic probability?
You didn't even respond to my comment, you just reasserted yourself as if you're right. Honest to god, I feel like you leftists unified together to **** with me, or you are all demonstrably disingenuous beyond any conceivable notion.
Saying that the Left and Right have an equal amout of influence in Hollywood because a few right-wing movies exist = bad
Saying that the Left and Right are both equally anti-intellectual even though the Right denies evolution, the Big Bang, archaeology, and climate change more than the Left does = good?
You are intelligent enough to include both the left and right in the first premise of your argument, but then you list the things the right deny, and exclude, ignore, overlook, preclude, and rule out all the things the left denies in the second premise of your argument, and try to pass that off as a fair conclusion?
The left denies Physiology, Human evolution, Race, IQ, gender disparities, Psychology, and even objective truth and you somehow overlooked that. Why?
I'm not even conservative. I like to identify as a centrist for several reasons, but primarily to avoid being pigeonholed with the label attached to my name, but my political evaluations always result in me being center left, and my principles and political beliefs lean left. I am without a doubt liberal in the classical sense. But, for the life of me, I cannot understand why people who share similar values to me, who lean on the same political side of the spectrum as me, and who should have similar sensibilities as me, can be so shortsighted and subjective. Why do I find myself in constant conflict with people who carry the same label. I feel like the only liberal on this message board that doesn't see the world through a lenses of tribalistic bias, who can not only see when the right is right and wrong, or the the left is right and wrong, but also acknowledge it objectionably.
Liberalism and conservatism are ideologies, not political parties. You can't get rid of ideologies.
Gravity is also "just a theory." Scientific theories require a lot of evidence, and all 3 of those have all of the evidence pointing towards them being true.
The conservative ideology does not include the denial of evolution, big bang, climate change, nor does the liberal ideology include the denial of physiology, psychology, evolution, race, and IQ. You're conflating ideologies with individuals
Conservatives deny X
Conservativism does not detail X
The conservative ideology does not include the denial of evolution, big bang, climate change, nor does the liberal ideology include the denial of physiology, psychology, evolution, race, and IQ. You're conflating ideologies with individuals
Uh, for the most part, yes it does. I already proved to you that 85% of conservatives deny climate change, something which you've neglected to mention.
As for evolution, it's funny because there are less conservatives who believe in evolution in 2013 than in 2009. In 2013, more conservatives believed in creationism over evolution.
Uh, for the most part, yes it does. I already proved to you that 85% of conservatives deny climate change, something which you've neglected to mention.
As for evolution, it's funny because there are less conservatives who believe in evolution in 2013 than in 2009. In 2013, more conservatives believed in creationism over evolution.
Its either yes a no, numbnuts; look to up the Socratic method. Does the conservative ideology detail denying climate change? (Do you have to deny climate change in order to follow the conservative ideology?)
My argument is that there is a separation between the individual and the ideology, there's no point in arguing with me if you believe that.
Your argument is very confused and close-minded. You're arguing with someone who knows the difference and is telling you that just because something is a theory with overwhelming evidence supporting it, it is deniable until it becomes law.
The way you would have it, all theories are fact and anyone who denies them are big 'uge dummies.
And yet, it's still a theory...? Show me the absolute proof that sets this simple theory over the top and stops explaining why these events are happening and can actually predict events. Because that is when it becomes undeniable law.
I think you need to watch the video you linked me. A theory is not FACT. A theory has overwhelming evidence, however that does not make it fact. It does not make it irrational to explore ideas because that is how theories are formed in the very first place.
In your case you're arguing the theory of gravity is undeniable and irrational to disagree with... Well which one? There are several and have been several for many decades and centuries. How does our current model of gravity(taught in schools) explain dark matter? It doesn't. In the face of dark matter it is utterly garbage and worthless. Yet, are we not supposed to look further into gravity simply because there is a theory on it and it would be irrational to do any further research.
You are trying to go against the very fundamental reason science exists by trying to designate who can agree and disagree with scientific theory. The whole point of science is to disagree and prove it with undeniable evidence. There are very few things humans know to be undeniable.
There is the concept of foundationalism, that something's are in fact unprovable beyond a shadow of a doubt, meaning that something's cannot be argued or there would never be an end to the arguing. Aristotle acknowledged this in his writings; every argument rests on something that can't be proved and it is a mark of an uneducated person not to realize that, according to him.
Ex. Gravity is a foundational fact; you can use gravity as a point of reference to make an argument for ex. Physics, but you cannot argue gravity since it's an axiom on which arguments are made.
Its either yes a no, numbnuts; look to up the Socratic method. Does the conservative ideology detail denying climate change? (Do you have to deny climate change in order to follow the conservative ideology?)
My argument is that there is a separation between the individual and the ideology, there's no point in arguing with me if you believe that.
So who defines the ideology? If 85% of conservatives deny climate change or deny that man has any significant impact on it and that it's not a serious problem, then that would mean they've adopted that ideology.
It's a trend among conservatives and virtually every Republican representative and conservative speaker, such as Ben Shapiro, speak on this platform.
So who defines the ideology? If 85% of conservatives deny climate change or deny that man has any significant impact on it and that it's not a serious problem, then that would mean they've adopted that ideology.
It's a trend among conservatives and virtually every Republican representative and conservative speaker, such as Ben Shapiro, speak on this platform.
Anti-intellectualism is also prevalent in blue states too. Liberal universities would never accept an intellectual debate that questions the points of their ideology, and conservative students can face discrimination if they were revealed as anti-left. So this doesn't apply to the Right, as you're suggesting.
The core of intellectualism is questioning beliefs of an ideology, which the majority of populous adhere to. Anti-intellectualism is more propagated in conservative societies, because the foundation of conservatism is religion and intellectualism arose from a time where religion and state were one political entity.
But like I said; the point of intellectualism is to question an ideology's beliefs. So if a conservative who lives in a liberal state, say like New York, and he doesn't agree with certain liberal beliefs, then he's an intellectual by definition. Vice versa too for a liberal individual who lives in a red state, like Arizona.
Good thing I'm neither a conservative or liberal. When you adhere to a certain ideology that majority believe in, you're easy to brainwash.
Anti-intellectualism is also prevalent in blue states too. Liberal universities would never accept an intellectual debate that questions the points of their ideology, and conservative students can face discrimination if they were revealed as anti-left. So this doesn't apply to the Right, as you're suggesting.
The core of intellectualism is questioning beliefs of an ideology, which the majority of populous adhere to. Anti-intellectualism is more propagated in conservative societies, because the foundation of conservatism is religion and intellectualism arose from a time where religion and state were one political entity.
But like I said; the point of intellectualism is to question an ideology's beliefs. So if a conservative who lives in a liberal state, say like New York, and he doesn't agree with certain liberal beliefs, then he's an intellectual by definition. Vice versa too for a liberal individual who lives in a red state, like Arizona.
Good thing I'm neither a conservative or liberal. When you adhere to a certain ideology that majority believe in, you're easy to brainwash.
Conservatism and liberalism isn't just a label or a group, like some party; it's an ideology. If you share political beliefs that are conservative or liberal, then you would fall under that category whether you like it or not.
