"Why do Republicans and conservatives hate science?" That's a question we've been hearing for a couple of decades now, but it really became common during the COVID era and post-COVID era.
It was bad enough that the Right refused to place all of the blame for climate change on humanity. But when COVID came along and the Right starting asking questions about the origins of the virus and the effectiveness of COVID vaccines that had been developed very quickly and without time to provide for long-term monitoring of effects and efficacy, that's when the Left got really angry.
So you can imagine the sense of moral and scientific superiority that Democrats and liberals would experience upon seeing a graph like this one:
A tragic story in two charts:
— John Burn-Murdoch (@jburnmurdoch) August 2, 2023
1) It never used to be the case, but there is now a big partisan gap for trust in science in the US. Republicans are now essentially the anti-science party, while Dems are stridently pro pic.twitter.com/L7VcxAL8we
Are Republicans really "the anti-science party," with Democrats "stridently pro," though?
I think you've confused science with what that graph actually says which is "confidence in the scientific community". The right isn't anti-science, per se, it's anti institutions.
— Konstantin Kisin (@KonstantinKisin) August 2, 2023
This worries me as well, but it's not the same thing.
No confusion, I just think it’s a distinction without a difference:
— John Burn-Murdoch (@jburnmurdoch) August 3, 2023
• If science is disseminated by the scientific community, and the latter is not trusted, then nor is the science
• On climate change & vaccines, we have direct evidence that Reps don’t trust the science itself
But there is also quite a bit of evidence that Republicans have reasons to be skeptical on the "science" of climate change and COVID vaccines. And in the case of COVID vaccines, they have evidence of a very personal nature: getting vaccinated and boosted against COVID has not prevented them from being infected with the virus and/or spreading it to others. Sounds like those Republicans actually have a pretty solid foundation for their skepticism. Couple that with Anthony Fauci and Rochelle Walensky's, um, evolving positions and blatant love for power over the public and Democrats' politicization of COVID and you've got yourself evidence that Following the Science may not have actually been about following science at all.
March 2020, scientists publish a paper in Nature Medicine denying the lab origin theory of COVID even though they themselves (it now emerges) believed it was likely true. In other words, they lied.
— Whyvert (@whyvert) August 2, 2023
Is it rational to trust these scientists? https://t.co/oVw4NvliYE
The paper "The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2" has been cited nearly 6000 times.
— Whyvert (@whyvert) August 2, 2023
It helped to silence any dissent on the possibility of lab leak.
That's a great example of "science" being weaponized for purposes of control over the masses.
“Science” said the vaccine was 100% effective & prevented spread.
— EducatëdHillbilly™ (@RobProvince) August 2, 2023
When “science” says a virus somehow doesn’t spread during righteous violent protests and riots… people will no longer trust the science. https://t.co/diF6eSyM86
— EducatëdHillbilly™ (@RobProvince) August 3, 2023
Can't fault them for being skeptical, you know?
Is this actual empirical science or “there are 31 genders is science”?
— Gray Connolly (@GrayConnolly) August 2, 2023
Science or Science™?
— BuffaloGuyRon (@username2994544) August 3, 2023
that is the real question.
It's the real question, and it's a really important one.
Makes you wonder: Are Dems really more "pro-science" in general, or is it just that when they hear "science", they think "vaccines and climate change, i.e. stuff that Republicans don't like"?
— Kristian Niemietz has a hot take: Trump is bad! (@K_Niemietz) August 2, 2023
What if "science" meant "GM crops, nuclear and fracking are safe"?
"Science" has definitely come to mean "things Democrats like and favor." And that's not what "science" is supposed to be about.
By the way, something worth noting about John Burn-Murdoch, who posted the graph ...
@DrJBhattacharya is this the FT activist who falsely or misleadingly called a graph you posted "misinformation"? Or was that someone else?
— Joe Duarte 🏜️ (@ValidScience) August 2, 2023
Same one
— Jay Bhattacharya (@DrJBhattacharya) August 2, 2023
So we probably shouldn't be looking to John for the most thoughtful interpretation of available data. We probably shouldn't look to liberals or Democrats in general.
***
Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Twitchy's conservative reporting taking on the radical left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth. Join Twitchy VIP and use the promo code SAVEAMERICA to get 40% off your VIP membership!
