Leftists on CNN’s NewsNight Blame Nick Shirley, Trump, and Racism Instead of Somali...
Beyond the Pale: Code-Talker Tim Walz Tosses White Guys Under the Bus to...
CNN’s Abby Phillip Portrays Somali ‘Daycare’ Workers As Victims of Independent Journalist...
'Finally, Something NOT Infuriating!' NASA's Shot of Pluto's Icy Mountains Graces the Time...
UK Citizen Keir Starmer Was 'Delighted' to Have Back Home Says Zionists Are...
X User Posts About 'Immigrants Robbing You' but Accidentally Flexes Billionaires Who DIDN'...
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey Addresses the Somali Community in Somali to Defy Donald...
CNN Laments That 'MAGA Journalist' Nick Shirley Had No Guardrails
Brian Krassenstein Calls Fraud 'Racist' Because Thinking Past Talking Points Is Hard
Tim Walz's Worst Nightmare: A Round-Up of the Funniest Somali Fraud Memes Taking...
Tampon Tim's Go-To Move: Blame Trump for Billion-Dollar Minnesota Fraud Mess
CBS News Gives Its Analysis of Nick Shirley’s Viral Video, Finds No Recorded...
Marco Rubio Orders US Embassies to Analyze Government Policies That Facilitate Mass Migrat...
Catherine Herridge: Kash Patel Says Fraud Probes Were Buried Under Biden
From Bad to Worse: Mocked Politico Reporter Doubles Down, Insists Warning of Shootings...

Scientific American Endorses Kamala Harris for all the Science She'd Bring

ImgFlip

We've written before how once-respected magazines and journals like Nature, Popular Mechanics, and Scientific American have all thrown away their credibility in the name of politics. Nature, for example, reported that establishing a legal definition of whether someone is male or female based on the genitals they are born with "has no foundation in science." Popular Mechanics asked scientists for "the best, safest ways" to bring to the ground "a statue that you decide you no longer like."

Advertisement

Scientific American essentially endorsed Kamala Harris back in July by saying that because her mother was a biomedical scientist, Harris would bring science to the forefront of her administration. Her father was also a Marxist and she brought that to her administration, so maybe it makes sense.

The editors write:

In the November election, the U.S. faces two futures. In one, the new president offers the country better prospects, relying on science, solid evidence and the willingness to learn from experience. She pushes policies that boost good jobs nationwide by embracing technology and clean energy. She supports education, public health and reproductive rights. She treats the climate crisis as the emergency it is and seeks to mitigate its catastrophic storms, fires and droughts.

Only one of these futures will improve the fate of this country and the world. That is why, for only the second time in our magazine’s 179-year history, the editors of Scientific American are endorsing a candidate for president. That person is Kamala Harris.

Guess when the first time was?

Advertisement

But look at the science! Look at Harris' record on climate change and reproductive rights!

Look at Joe Biden's scientific approach to allowing boys to play on girls' sports teams. Or the fact that he ended cancer as we know it.

That or the Q&A session she had with child actors about Space Force and NASA. Plus, Joe Biden put her in charge of overseeing artificial intelligence and set her to meet with the leading innovators.

Advertisement

It looks like this is going to be a thing now every four years at Scientific American.

Remember when TIME Magazine named Ahmed “Clock Kid” Mohamed to its Most Influential Teens of 2015 list for what Barack Obama called his "cool clock" with the numbers on the inside of the case? He even got invited to Science Night at the White House where he got to mingle with other renowned scientists like Bill Nye, the Science Guy.

And they wonder why we don't trust scientists anymore.

***

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement