The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© 2017 AFPEconomic world meets Trump climate skepticism
By Antonio RODRIGUEZ and Jeremy TORDJMAN WASHINGTON©2023 GPlusMedia Inc.
7 Comments
Login to comment
CrazyJoe
The problem is not that most Americans don't understand science. The problem is that most Americans don't understand what science IS. They talk about whether or not they believe this or that. Science is NOT a belief structure. Science is NOT an "educated guess". Science is NOT about your opinions. The laws of physics don't care if you believe in them or not. They are not impacted by your beliefs, your political persuasions or your opinions. The fact that we need to take to the streets to tell our elected officials to pay attention to objective reality is a sure sign that humanity is doomed.
PTownsend
How many Trump appointees are connected with big energy? How many congress members have had their campaigns funded by big energy?
It's less about bad science, more about preserving the wealth of the 1% whose fortunes stem from big energy. To ensure that, environmental protections have to be scrapped.
Big energy leads to big military which leads to invading sovereign nations to take their resources. Iraq? Afghanistan? Libya? Syria? Where next?
Trump voters and supporters plus Republican voters and supporters: you own this.
On a big energy / big military / invading foreign nations theme, what is Trump's connection to Putin?
albaleo
@CrazyJoe, while I get your general point, I don't think your explanation of science is correct. The laws of physics are not a product of science, they are a product of nature. Science is a human activity - the study and understanding of the natural and physical world. As a human activity, it's subject to all the usual flaws that us meat units carry. I see a tendency recently among some to raise science to an almost religious level where belief is expected. Yet questioning scientific ideas is very much a part of the progress of science, as long as the questioning is done in a scientific way. Which brings me back to generally agreeing with the gist of your post.
albaleo
Zichi, those numbers refer to federal tax only, right? I'm pretty sure a much bigger proportion of total tax revenue goes on education.
Illyas
I like how after this patronizing introduction you go on to give a completely wrong definition of science.