Stefan Molyneux Liberals Leftists Are Disgusting
If You Enjoyed This Video Like Subscribe To My Channel Support Me Here In Patreon https://www.patreon.com/PeteTsim Stefan Molyneux https://www.youtube.com/user/stefbot ...
By: PETE TSIM
Read more:
Stefan Molyneux Liberals Leftists Are Disgusting - Video
February 23, 2015|5:17 pm
Protesters meet up in front of City Hall before an anti-fracking march and demonstration in Oakland, California, February 7, 2015. Thousands attended the march, urging Governor Jerry Brown to ban the controversial oil extraction procedure in the state.
Liberals can be just as anti-science as conservatives, a study finds, when the science challenges their politics.
"The Partisan Brain: How Dissonant Science Messages Lead Conservatives and Liberals to (Dis)Trust Science," was posted online and will be published in the March issue of The Annals of the American Acadamy of Political and Social Science, which contains several articles of the theme of politics and science. The Ohio State authors are Erik Nisbet, associate professor of communication and political science, Kathryn Cooper, a doctoral student in communication, and R. Kelly Garrett, associate professor of communication.
The findings challenge previous research reporting that the brains of conservatives are different than the brains of liberals and "are fundamentally less capable of rationally processing scientific evidence."
The study's sample of 1,518 adults were divided into three groups. Group one was asked about scientific research related to climate change and evolution that challenged the views of many conservatives; group two was asked about scientific research related to fracking (a natural gas extraction method) and nuclear power that challenged the views of many liberals; and group three was asked about politically neutral scientific research related to astronomy or geology.
Both liberals and conservatives were less likely to trust the scientific results in the groups where those results were out of sync with their own ideology.
Interestingly, liberals, moderates and conservatives were all less trustful of the science that was related to political debates compared to the ideologically neutral science. In other words, conservatives were less trustful of science related to fracking and nuclear power, though not as distrustful as liberals, compared to science related to ideologically-neutral astronomy and geology findings. And liberals were less trustful of science related to climate change and evolution, though not as distrusful as conservatives, compared to the ideologically neutral science.
Conservatives and liberals were not equally likely to reject the science that was dissonant with their ideology. Conservatives were more likely than liberals to be distrustful. The authors attribute this to media coverage of the debates.
There has been much coverage of the scientific debates over climate change and evolution. By comparison, there has been little coverage of the scientific debates over fracking and nuclear power. Respondents, therefore, would be much more aware of controversies over climate change and evolution than fracking and nuclear power.
The rest is here:
Liberals Are as Anti-Science as Conservatives, Study Finds
TORONTO - Two Ontario Liberals, including the premier's deputy chief of staff, appear to have contravened a bribery section of the Election Act, the province's electoral officer said Thursday in an "unprecedented" finding.
An Elections Ontario investigation found there is evidence that Premier Kathleen Wynne's deputy chief of staff, Pat Sorbara, and a local Liberal organizer offered a would-be candidate a job or appointment to get him to step aside in a recent byelection in Sudbury.
For weeks the premier has refused opposition calls to remove Sorbara from her role while under investigation and the government has said it is unable to step in to remove Gerry Lougheed as chair of the city's police services board.
The demands grew louder Thursday after Elections Ontario's conclusions were tabled in the legislature just minutes before question period, apparently catching the premier off guard.
"We all just got this information," Wynne said more than half a dozen times. "We are taking it under advisement...What I will not do is take rash advice from the other side of the floor until I've had an opportunity to consider all of the information."
The Liberals were quick to point out that Elections Ontario did not implicate Wynne herself nor Glenn Thibeault, the former NDP MP who won the Feb. 5 byelection for the Liberals.
Greg Essensa, the chief electoral officer of Ontario, concluded that Sorbara and Lougheed's actions "constitute an apparent contravention" of a section of the Election Act concerning "bribery in connection with inducing a person to become, refrain from becoming, or withdrawing from being a candidate."
Essensa called the circumstances "unprecedented."
"No chief electoral officer of Ontario has ever conducted a regulatory investigation into allegations of bribery or ever reported an apparent contravention of the Election Act or the Election Finances Act to the Ministry of the Attorney General," he said in his statement.
See more here:
Sudbury Byelection Scandal: Ontario Liberals May Have Contravened Election Act
The federal Liberal Party has apologized for confusing a slain Russian politician with one who is very much alive.
The mix-up came earlier this week when the Liberals mistook former Russian deputy prime minister Boris Nemtsov for ex-PM Mikhail Kasyanov in a statement regarding Nemtsov's death.
The statement quoted Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau recalling a meeting with Nemtsov "just a few months ago" that actually happened with Kasyanov.
"Mr. Nemtsov and I met in Ottawa just a few months ago, where we discussed his unwavering and passionate desire for a free and prosperous Russia," Trudeau was quoted as saying in the statement.
The Liberals acknowledged the mistake Wednesday and said they pulled the statement from their website as soon as it was discovered.
A Liberal spokesperson says one of Trudeau's staffers was responsible for the mistake.
"A staff member confused a meeting that Mr. Trudeau had with former Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov a few months ago," the spokesperson told CTV Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife in a statement.
She says Trudeau asked the staffer to write up a statement to express his "shock and sadness" over Nemtsov's death.
"We regret the error and continue to offer our sincere sympathies to Mr. Nemtsov's loved ones and the people of Russia," she added.
Former deputy PM Boris Nemtsov was shot dead in Moscow near the Kremlin building on Feb. 27, just days before a planned protest march against President Putin. His killer has not been identified.
Read the original post:
Liberals apologize for mixing up living and dead Russian politicians
By Traci Pedersen Associate News Editor Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on February 22, 2015 ~ 2 min read
Both conservatives and liberals tend to show bias against science that doesnt align with their political views, say researchers from Ohio State University. In a new study, they found that individuals from both parties expressed less trust in science when presented with facts that challenged specific politicized issues.
For conservatives, this was climate change and evolution, and for liberals, it was hydraulic fracturing (fracking) and nuclear power. The researchers caution, however, that the results shouldnt be interpreted to create a false balance in which each side could be seen as equally wrong on all issues.
Our point is there is evidence of bias on both sides, although the bias may appear on different issues, said co-author R. Kelly Garrett, Ph.D., an associate professor of communication at Ohio State.
For example, adds co-author Erik Nisbet, Ph.D., associate professor of communication and political science, liberals may be biased about some issues, but that doesnt mean they are wrong about humans causing climate change. You cant say our study supports the climate denialism movement.
For the study, 1,518 participants were told they would be evaluating a new educational website about science. The researchers, however, were actually trying to see how people reacted to science that they knew from previous studies challenged the views of conservatives (climate change, evolution) as well as science that challenged liberals (fracking, nuclear power). They also included science that no one seems to have a problem with (geology and astronomy).
All participants were asked a variety of questions, including their political ideology and their knowledge about science. Then they were randomly assigned one of the six science topics.
They were asked four true or false questions assessing the accuracy of their beliefs about the topic they were assigned. These questions all concerned well-accepted scientific facts.
Participants then viewed the educational website page about their science topic. They were asked to rate how much they felt several emotions, including anger and annoyance, after viewing the website.
Next they were asked questions designed to find out how motivated the participants were to resist the facts presented on the website. For instance, they were asked whether they felt the website was objective or whether it tried to pressure me to think a certain way.
Read more:
Both Liberals and Conservatives Show Science Bias