First ever presidential endorsement by Scientific American
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
Scientific American is a popular science magazine. It's editors are experienced, salaried science journalists. I doubt they apply for research grants from NIH or NSF
Darth Omar
Russian asset
I’ve never know science to take a partisan position lol.
so every 4 years you shit stains are going to make this claim
I posted proof - 4 years ago they were political as hell. so fuck off - your lies were exposed and your thread is bullshit
Think man, think!
You did not answer the question.
Every journalist, scientist, citizen has an opinion about politics, science priorities, and science policy.
The question is, why did Scientific American consider this election so extraordinary, their editorial board took the unprecedented of publishing a formal presidential endorsement for the first time in its 175 year history?
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
Because quite frankly, politics has invaded science and the science in many fields is no longer "good" science but rather tainted with political ends in mind. You can find this is virtually every issue of SA today.
This election? I posted a link showing they pulled the same essential claim 4 years ago - and that article from 4 years ago alluded to the same concerns from 8 years ago
before a single policy was implemented. before covid. that rag become a partisan hack site that said - "boy we think this is really out of the ordinary, but here goes"
you morons think that will work every 4 years? they did this in 2012, 2016, and now 2020
and shit stains like you fall for it
All ya need to do is follow who is paying their salaries! Probably Soros!
Probably believe in evolution too!
CharacterAssassin
Verified User
This election? I posted a link showing they pulled the same essential claim 4 years ago - and that article from 4 years ago alluded to the same concerns from 8 years ago
before a single policy was implemented. before covid. that rag become a partisan hack site that said - "boy we think this is really out of the ordinary, but here goes"
you morons think that will work every 4 years? they did this in 2012, 2016, and now 2020
and shit stains like you fall for it
No, silly whore, the link you supplied didn't actually demonstrate they did the same claim 4 years ago.
Fun to see you sputter and wheeze when confronted with things that frighten and confuse you, Mrs. Bubbles
in 2007 they blasted the GOP for being anti science for that reason as well.
Cypress won't apologize for crapping all over the forum- he lies and pulls this bullshit all the time
You should get back to digging graves for your chinese cootie victims.
in 2016 they made the same claim -
in 2012 as well
in 2007 they faulted both parties - but the GOP was "the real problem"
sorry shit stain - your partisan rag was outed
This election? I posted a link showing they pulled the same essential claim 4 years ago - and that article from 4 years ago alluded to the same concerns from 8 years ago
before a single policy was implemented. before covid. that rag become a partisan hack site that said - "boy we think this is really out of the ordinary, but here goes"
you morons think that will work every 4 years? they did this in 2012, 2016, and now 2020
and shit stains like you fall for it
Scientific American's formal presidential endorsement is unprecedented in it's 175 year history.
Plenty of Republicans and conservatives have run for Prez before now, but the magazine did not deem it necessary to issue a formal endorsement.
What is it about the dim-witted, science-denying, pandemic-mishandling Trump that caused the magazine to issue an endorsement for the first time in almost two centuries?
Scientific American is based in science. They know the man's contribution to global warming is serious and dangerous. They also know Trump is unable to handle the science ,but just keep repreating his uninformed and unevolving anti-science positions. They did not seek a political bent, Trump thrust it onto them. You cannot sit in silence when you know a person like Trump is doing real damage to the planet. The first time in 175 years should impress even rightys.
no - it isn't
2016 - "Donald Trump’s Lack of Respect for Science Is Alarming"
2012 - " Indeed, in this election cycle, some 236 years after Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence, several major party contenders for political office took positions that can only be described as “antiscience”: against evolution, human-induced climate change, vaccines, stem cell research, and more. A former Republican governor even warned that his own political party was in danger of becoming “the antiscience party.”
2007 - same ol shit
you are a joke
Bigdog
Harris - make America a 3rd world shithole
Any doubts that 'science' has been politicized have been officially removed.
And you Leftards doubted us.
I understand your reticence to answer the actual question. I would not want to have to defend the dim witted Trump either.
Lying will not change the facts of the matter. Opinion columns are not formal presidential endorsements.
Scientific American's formal presidential endorsement is unprecedented in it's 175 year history.
Plenty of Republicans and conservatives have run for Prez before now, but the magazine did not deem it necessary to issue a formal endorsement.
What is it about the dim-witted, science-denying, pandemic-mishandling Trump that caused the magazine to issue a formal presidential endorsement for the first time in almost two centuries?
Darth Omar
Russian asset
TDS.
you can try to make this historic all you want - but the fact is every 4 years they politicize the magazine and say things to try to help democrats at the expense of republicans