• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Scientific American endorses a presidential candidate for the first time in its 175 year history

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
28,195
865
955
A compelling argument against anti-science and anti-intellectualism.

They don't seem super jazzed about Biden, more alarmed by the Trump administration's actions and stances.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: prag16

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
20,317
38,988
1,160
These hacks.

Every "scientist" was telling us that the threat was low, there is nothing to worry about, and if there is one thing you shouldn't do is WEAR A MASK. Remember the SG begging people not to buy masks? Or Fauci calling everyone idiots who don't know how to wear a mask properly. I can go and quote the WHO documentation from January that specifically says if you are no infected THEN DO NOT WEAR A MASK.

And this doesn't even take into account all the health officials that decided Social Justice is more dangerous then the virus and told people to go out and protest. We had nurses and doctors going out in their scrubs and contaminating them to clap protester walking shoulder to shoulder spitting virus into each others faces.

This is all FUD to keep pushing the lie that Trump didn't follow the science. But Birx and Fauci have said Trump did everything they told him. He followed what the science told him. If anything he went against "science" when he travel banned China. Remember the WHO "scientist" said that there should be no travel and TRADE restrictions.

Its just propaganda to try keep pushing the narrative that Trump didn't listen to anyone and ignored all "science" and health experts which is total BS. The guy knew it was airborne in Feb when they were pushing it survives on surfaces for 3 days so wash your groceries. HE called the death rate at 1% when everyone was pushing 5%. Trump has been ahead of the curve actually.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Torrent of Pork

DeepBreath87

Member
Jun 15, 2019
1,111
2,085
395
"Science" is not the same as science. As soon as the left starting trying to use Science to control people, we should've realized wear this was headed. Much like BLM, the Science is now a slogan placeholder for anything the Marxist left agrees with. This "Science" is a secular religion.

According to this "Science":

Biology isn't real. Men and women aren't even real categories. A man can be a woman just by feeling like one. So being a woman or a man is just a feeling. A woman can have a penis and vice versa.

Climate "Science" says every bad storm is a result of climate change. But individual weather events are also not an indicator climate change.

Racism is a public health issue somehow. Its racism that causes diabetes and hypertension and obesity.

The new slogan for the Left is "Science is Real". I think its quite ironic how close the Christians saying "God is Real".
 

Patriots7

Member
Jul 15, 2008
3,167
446
1,065
A compelling argument against anti-science and anti-intellectualism.

They don't seem super jazzed about Biden, more alarmed by the Trump administration's actions and stances.
Pretty sure that's the vast majority of supporters of Biden.
 

pennythots

Member
May 14, 2019
1,707
2,806
485
It's unfortunate that institutions that have always been non-partisan are now forced to become partisan against Trump.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Tygeezy

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
27,098
62,956
1,375
USA
dunpachi.com
It's unfortunate that institutions that have always been non-partisan are now forced to become partisan against Trump.
Read your own sentence over again.

This is the stuff of cults. We would've stuck by our beliefs, but O-o-orange Man...

It is the same logic the media swallowed to excuse their insane fearmongering and partisanship, too.
 

TTOOLL

Member
Mar 22, 2012
4,094
3,038
860
I mean, we have to value science, obviously. However, if you got anywhere near academia you know how dirty things can be. It's just like any other area populated by humans. We have to stop putting these people above the rest.
 

DeepBreath87

Member
Jun 15, 2019
1,111
2,085
395
It's unfortunate that institutions that have always been non-partisan are now forced to become partisan against Trump.
Trump forced them to become partisan? He forced them? How? They can make all the points they want about Trump's policies or their feelings about science without wading into politics. This line of argument is like an abusive husband saying to his wife, "why would you make me hit you?"
 

pennythots

Member
May 14, 2019
1,707
2,806
485
Trump forced them to become partisan? He forced them? How? They can make all the points they want about Trump's policies or their feelings about science without wading into politics. This line of argument is like an abusive husband saying to his wife, "why would you make me hit you?"
Maybe Trump should stop trying to wade into science.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
39,596
70,898
1,200
Trump forced them to become partisan? He forced them? How? They can make all the points they want about Trump's policies or their feelings about science without wading into politics. This line of argument is like an abusive husband saying to his wife, "why would you make me hit you?"
They should probably do a peer reviewed study on the impact of such a mushy brainbowl that easily succumbs to TDS.

But that may require a bit of introspection and self awareness.
 
  • Like
Reactions: slugbahr

DragoonKain

Member
Nov 13, 2013
5,346
9,158
1,015
Does anyone think other presidents would’ve handled the COVID response that differently?
 

DeepBreath87

Member
Jun 15, 2019
1,111
2,085
395
Does anyone think other presidents would’ve handled the COVID response that differently?
I mean Obama would've conjured PPE from the air and pulled accurate testing kits out of his ass. Then he would've called the virus racist, forcing it to retreat. Remember when his Presidency slowed the rising of the seas and healed the planet? I do.


COVID wouldn't have had a chance.
 
Last edited:

Paracelsus

Member
Jun 24, 2007
10,066
2,432
1,370
Seems worth following.
 

Derekloffin

Member
Jun 17, 2013
588
227
535
Does anyone think other presidents would’ve handled the COVID response that differently?
Differently, definitely, better is the question. I don't like a lot of Trump's particulars, but when it comes to the big picture, I don't see much ultimately changing. This endorsement does the usual 'X people have died, it's all Trumps fault' BS, which basically invalidates it in my book as anything other than a political statement rather than an honest scientific critique. No world leader has managed a 0 death toll that is reporting honestly. So trying to link Trump to every death is automatically a political and dishonest attack. Put up some actual facts and real analysis of other scenarios and maybe we can talk the science of his response, but this is just politics. And then there is the matter that honestly all these measures may ultimately prove more damaging in the long term. We won't know the true fall out of the response for likely years if not decades to come.
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
20,317
38,988
1,160
No way anyone was closing down earlier. USA only had 1 death by March 1st.

People dont realize how unprecedented this is. Even other outbreaks there was never any of these types of lockdowns.

Add in the fact that it was an election year and no matter the side politics and the election would have been played. Imagine HRC going for a 2nd term you think shes shutting down with FOX news shitting on her?


I do think another POTUS would have probably taken more power and not left up as much to the states. And who knows if they would have partnered with the private sector.
 
  • Like
Reactions: diffusionx
May 22, 2018
7,601
9,226
680
After everything Trump has said and done when it comes to climate change and this whole COVID mess this doesn't really surprise me as much as it should. He has effectively made science a political issue and that is something that should never happen.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: prag16
May 22, 2018
7,601
9,226
680
Reads like the DNC wrote it. Sounds like these "scientists" want to be politicians. Fuck them.
I like how the standard response to anyone who has an opinion these days is "fuck them". Doctors, athletes, celebrities, and now apparently scientists as well.
 
Last edited:

ExpandKong

Barlog's Bestie
Jan 9, 2018
3,370
8,505
725
I like how the standard response to anyone who has an opinion these days is "fuck them". Doctors, athletes, celebrities, and now apparently scientists as well.
Hey did you notice how none of those people are politicians or political scientists? Why the fuck should I give a shit about their political opinions?

Celebrity say orange man bad?
Science magazine say orange man bad?
Oh gee that’s all i need to hear

Fuck them.
 
  • Strength
Reactions: slugbahr

DeepBreath87

Member
Jun 15, 2019
1,111
2,085
395
I like how the standard response to anyone who has an opinion these days is "fuck them". Doctors, athletes, celebrities, and now apparently scientists as well.
HAHAHA!!! Athletes?? Celebrities??? Really? That’s who you think I should be listening to? Maybe I should listen to the children too.

I get doctors and scientists. Although I think the political organizations that claim to represent them do anything but.
 
Oct 26, 2018
12,852
16,809
695
And here I thought something like Scientific America would be a bunch of articles written by people resembling my high school science teachers, researchers and PhDs in some field of science.

Never knew they were expert at politics too.
 
May 22, 2018
7,601
9,226
680
HAHAHA!!! Athletes?? Celebrities??? Really? That’s who you think I should be listening to? Maybe I should listen to the children too.

I get doctors and scientists. Although I think the political organizations that claim to represent them do anything but.
Where did I say you should listen to them? I was just pointing out the go to move is to attack them and/or boycott them.
 

spandexmonkey

Member
Dec 17, 2009
2,008
1,251
1,045
Memphis, TN
I like how the standard response to anyone who has an opinion these days is "fuck them". Doctors, athletes, celebrities, and now apparently scientists as well.
This response is the precise reason so many, back in the day, avoided politics. Politics, by it's nature, is divisive. For years the left wanted everything to be political (demonizing neutrality), well now we're living the dream. So fuck "scientists", celebrities, and other fevered egos all wanting to play politics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Torrent of Pork

betrayal

Member
Feb 2, 2018
1,223
1,741
395
Scientific American has never been neutral. They have always taken a clear position, especially in election years, and have always been in favor of the Clinton or Biden and against Trump.


...or search for articles about Trump: https://www.scientificamerican.com/search/?q=trump

vs Biden: https://www.scientificamerican.com/search/?q=biden

So as anyone can easily see, it is clear from the titles of the articles alone that Scientific American has always taken a clear stand.
 
Last edited:

eot

Member
Apr 13, 2012
11,914
3,191
800
And people wonder why academics, especially in the social sciences, might be directed to only do research that fits a certain ideological bias. With editors this partisan, who is going to pursue research that will strengthen conservative arguments?
This is a popular science magazine, not a scientific journal
 

Boswollocks

Member
Apr 19, 2019
7,473
11,659
770
Mars
pop-science is one of the main pillars of pop-culture and thus should be taken as what it is; popular stories to give the 'pop' masses something to talk about. Same with pop-music, pop-culture, pop-fashion.

It's sludge and gruel for the starving, desperate, weak-minded zombie consumerists.

Does that read to conspiracy to be believable? Don't take my word for it, go look at the world through neutral eyes and see just how depressing it really is.
 

Teletraan1

Member
May 17, 2012
7,783
7,169
805
Canada
What kind of science was used to attribute every covid death to the president? Are scientists really trying to imply that had he listened to whatever solution that is never mentioned/offered deaths would have dropped to zero? I guess magic is just science we don't understand yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam