I bet "bigots" love this science LOL

[OCinBuffalo]

http://www.american....d-gay-parenting

 

And, of course, I'm a "bigot" for posting it. It's hilarious that a "morally superior" clown, who calls me a bigot, forgets that, by definition, what he says is completely irrelevant for me, and for most other people. The PC cat is out of the bag, clowns. The Race Card is maxed out, etc.

 

I don't think it's possible for me to care less what a PC person says, because whatever it is, also by definition, is based on their personal "feelings", and not on reason, or morality. Morality is not defined by them, morality just: is. Their values '= morality. They are simply their feelings. I'm never going to care about their feelings. I will always care about their thoughts, right up until the point where they can be proven false.

 

Look, I'm sure there are methodology flaws in the study. DC_Tom has made us all aware of the "quality assurance" problems in science, in general, for years. But, this OUTRAGE! repsonse tells you all you need to know about the PC "science" community, and those that carry their water on a daily basis(hence the title of this thread). Politics has no place in science.

 

And, the University of Texas...blah, blah, blah. How the hell could a professor from Harvard or Berkley, even get a study like this off the ground? Never happen. It would be "killed in committee". Yeah, yeah, and the author of the essay is from a "Christian" school. He's the vice chancellor of graduate education and a law professor, so spare us the BS.

 

I agree with his conclusion(I've been saying it for years), that you MUST have diversity of thought. In coporate America we've seen huge improvements in terms of understanding problems, never mind solving them, due to increased diversity.

 

So, goose/gander...etc. That's because: "humans in groups" doesn't change, just because the venue changes.

 

However, the point I think he's failed to see? The "system" is set up to be pre-disposed towards liberal thought. It's "systemic liberalism"

 

The government has set itself up as the "lead funder and advocate" of science. This isn't true. The tax money they spend, isn't theirs, so, it's not "their money". However, they pretend it is, and therefore, if you are a scientist, you are a "government guy". That is, unless you work for an oil company, right? You know, there are only 2 kinds of scientists = scientists, and people that work for oil companies, right progressives?

 

The point is: even with diversity, there's still the back-pocket issue of "where does my $ come from". Scientists have bills just like everybody else, and they will "vote their wallet", just like everybody else. Spare me the "higher calling" crap. Live like a real monk, and then come back and talk to me.

 

Perhaps we should take science away from the government, and allow companies and individuals the ability fund it instead?

 

I mean all these "crowd funding" sites seem to work, right?

Edited December 18, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[Koko78]

Stop being such a bigot.