Jonathan Turley Does a Self-Awareness Check on Biden After Saying We Should Be...
Honey, TAKE ALL the Seats! Jen Rubin Learns the HARD Way Trump Supporters...
Just WOW! Add THIS to the Multitude of Reasons Jen Psaki and the...
Talking Point Calling Americans Lazy UNLESS They Work 80 Hours a Week NUKED...
CBS Reporter Lets Journo Colleagues Know 2024's Most Under-Reported Story (They Already Kn...
Biting Babies Not Included: The Hill Wants Us to Remember Biden's Five Greatest...
Church of Sweden Set to Close SEVEN Churches for Climate Change
Monday Morning Meme Madness
Presidential Predictions: Scott Jennings Sees Two Things Happening in Early 2025
Turtleneck Tantrum: Don Lemon Rants and Raves in New Video as Search for...
Neo-Confusion: Republican Chris Sununu Says Trump Has Not Permanently Transformed the GOP
‘Journalist’ Roundtable Unintentionally Reveals the Biggest Story of the Year They Conspir...
Cringe Benefit! Tim and Gwen Walz Post Weird New Year’s Resolution Video About...
Trash-Talking Ad: Rogue Transit Poster Depicts MAGA Supporters as Garbage in Washington, D...
COVID Part Deux: Lockdown and Vaccine Passport-Loving Leana Wen Pushing for Bird Flu...

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