#8,690 in Science & math books
Reddit mentions of Science Left Behind: Feel-Good Fallacies and the Rise of the Anti-Scientific Left
Sentiment score: -1
Reddit mentions: 3
We found 3 Reddit mentions of Science Left Behind: Feel-Good Fallacies and the Rise of the Anti-Scientific Left. Here are the top ones.
or
Specs:
| Height | 9 Inches |
| Length | 6 Inches |
| Number of items | 1 |
| Release date | February 2014 |
| Weight | 0.82893810512 Pounds |
| Width | 1 Inches |
Everyone ignores science they find inconvenient. Or are you going to tell me there's not a similar and perhaps worse anti-science agenda on the left?
Are those the same people who claim to believe in science but don't trust the science that shows GMOs are safe (looking at you Bill Nye the "Science" guy), fracking is safe, that nuclear energy is safe (pretty much everyone on the left for those two) and that vaccines are safe (looking at you Bill Maher)?
Science Left Behind: Feel-Good Fallacies and the Rise of the Anti-Scientific Left has even more examples of anti-science positions of the left.
> here's not a single politicized topic where right wingers are on the right side of science,
Um, abortion. Vaccination. GMOs. Here is a whole book on how the left also rejects science: https://www.amazon.com/Science-Left-Behind-Feel-Good-Anti-Scientific/dp/161039321X . It would seem that both sides of the political spectrum are against science when it conflicts with their politics.
> That's because fact-based rhetoric appeals to liberals, but feelings-based rhetoric appeals to conservatives.
Can you back up this claim? Is there any research that supports this?
> Liberals usually believe in evolution, because they are willing to listen to scientists. Conservatives repeatedly try to get creationism taught in school,
There are wackos on both sides of the political spectrum. It is biased to cite ignore one side's wackos while citing the other side's. It is also disingenuous to claim the wackos are the other side's mainstream.