4 ms·

"point blank denial of facts" ...such as the relative safety of nuclear power and GMO foods? Or the potential effectiveness of missile defense? Ideology of al

"point blank denial of facts" ...such as the relative safety of nuclear power and GMO foods? Or the potential effectiveness of missile defense? Ideology of all stripes can, and does, frequently come hand-in-hand with flat denial of inconvenient facts.

jolux 11y ago
The difference is that the American right is ideologically homogeneous and the American left is a mess of different ideologies that agree on a few things and so elect candidates from the Democratic party. And furthermore, you're implicitly and explicitly misrepresenting the arguments against all of those things which you claim leftists hawk as evil. Nuclear power is powerful, sure, I don't think anyone denies that. But it leaves us with piles of toxic waste and very few ways to rid ourselves of it, so it's not as if it's a done deal. Especially not when sources like solar and wind have many of the same benefits without the toxic aftereffects. As for GMO foods, I'm an aspiring synthetic biologist myself and I can say that there's nothing inherently dangerous with the scientific side of it, nor does there seem to be anything explicitly awful going on with commercial GMOs right now. The problems I have with GMOs are more what I see as potential problems, specifically that the companies creating them have less than sterling reputations for concern of public safety. I'm also generally wary of deregulation of industry, because historically it has not ended well. I think people shouldn't trust large companies implicitly, especially when these large companies are saying "please trust us". I should highlight that none of these constitute point blank denial of science in the way the denying global warming does. As for complaints with the potential effectiveness of missile defense, you'll have to be a bit more specific.

4 ms·

"point blank denial of facts" ...such as the relative safety of nuclear power and GMO foods? Or the potential effectiveness of missile defense? Ideology of al

by 13thLetter 11y ago

jolux 11y ago
The difference is that the American right is ideologically homogeneous and the American left is a mess of different ideologies that agree on a few things and so elect candidates from the Democratic party. And furthermore, you're implicitly and explicitly misrepresenting the arguments against all of those things which you claim leftists hawk as evil. Nuclear power is powerful, sure, I don't think anyone denies that. But it leaves us with piles of toxic waste and very few ways to rid ourselves of it, so it's not as if it's a done deal. Especially not when sources like solar and wind have many of the same benefits without the toxic aftereffects. As for GMO foods, I'm an aspiring synthetic biologist myself and I can say that there's nothing inherently dangerous with the scientific side of it, nor does there seem to be anything explicitly awful going on with commercial GMOs right now. The problems I have with GMOs are more what I see as potential problems, specifically that the companies creating them have less than sterling reputations for concern of public safety. I'm also generally wary of deregulation of industry, because historically it has not ended well. I think people shouldn't trust large companies implicitly, especially when these large companies are saying "please trust us". I should highlight that none of these constitute point blank denial of science in the way the denying global warming does. As for complaints with the potential effectiveness of missile defense, you'll have to be a bit more specific.