Comments by "Theodore Shulman" (@ColonelFredPuntridge) on "Jordan B Peterson Clips"
channel.
-
10
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The first reason you guys keep losing is the American voters don't agree with most of your ideas. (We don't agree that tax-cuts which mostly benefit the upper-bracket income people are good for everyone else. We don't agree that you can bring manufacturing back to USA by building a wall and passing unwieldy, blunt tariffs. We don't agree that women who presume to be sexually active should be punished by being forced to complete an unwanted pregnancy and give birth if they prefer to get an abortion. We don't agree that all our problems are caused by Chinese, or Mexicans, or trans-people. We don't agree that we can pollute without limits indefinitely without causing disasters. We don't believe that the biotech industry is out to get us (although it's certainly not perfect).) That is why your victories increasingly depend on making voting as difficult for everyone as it can be, and on the structural flaws in the Electoral College and the US Senate which disproportionately favor uneducated voters who live in very-rural states.
The second reason conservatives keep losing is you have hitched your wagon to a confidence man whose decides what to say and what to do based on only one criterion: he says and does whatever will cause his cult members to send more money faster and sooner.
In order to fix the problem, you will have to disengage from confidence men, including from the false-religious hucksters who have managed to acquire control of your party, and, you will have to stop supporting outrageous positions which run contrary to people's common sense. You will have to abandon fake science (and I'm not talking about COVID.) You will have to give up the illusion (which is not entirely your fault, but which fools you more often than it fools your opponents) that an untrained person who doesn't know math can have an opinion worth listening to about scientific subjects like what research projects we ought to be funding. You will have to respond to questions like "is the shrimp-treadmill a good use of our research dollars" the same way you would respond to an invitation to referee a professional boxing match. You'd say "I'm sorry, I don't know anything about this subject, so you'll have to ask someone who does." Unless you have done science-work with your own hands, that is the only truthful answer you can give to any scientific question. (The definition of "woman" is not a scientific question; it is a question of linguistic choice.)
in other words, you will have to start admitting: The world is complicated.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@aynrandish9106 No, I'm a retired monoclonal-antibody guy. But I know enough to read epidemiology papers. And I know enough to know that the odds of SARS-CoV-2 being engineered deliberately and with malice are very close to nil. It's either natural-origin (by far most likely) or, conceivably, an unintentional lab-leak (unlikely, but possible).
(Monoclonal antibodies are SO versatile that many of us who specialize in working on them end up becoming familiar with many specialties. Antibody-specialists are also generalists. I have created antibody-based reagents and designed antibody-based assays for use by so many different types of scientists - basic cell biologists, oncologists, environmental chemists, plant pathologists, plant biologists, neurologists, endocrinologists, diabeticians, drug-development people, genetic engineers, cardiologists, virologists, and, yes, epidemiologists, - that I can read pretty much anything in biology, biochem, or medicine, except for hard-core physics.)
1