Science in the USA

[Anonymous No.3580453]

Good evening /sci/.
Not being from the US myself, i have a question for you:
Which one of the political parties is more pro-science?

Here in Germany all we get to hear is how democrats and republicans cant agree on Gun control, Dept, Taxes, Immigrants etc..
But they dont really mention their stances on science.

(I hope this will not turn into a flamewar, im really just cruious)

[Anonymous No.3580463]

democrat

republicans are a bunch of creationist flat earthers

[Anonymous No.3580471]

>>3580453
>Dept

Oh, so you're THAT guy, huh?

[Anonymous No.3580482]

I'd say the democrats are more for science for the sake of science, whereas the repubs have no qualms with supporting science provided it helps their war machine.

[Anonymous No.3580531]

Neither of them help science very much, the creationism debate is vastly over-rated in importance compared to things like at what age students should start being taught calculus and the approach to promoting literacy, numeracy and getting children interested in science.

[Anonymous No.3580537]

Watch this, OP.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7Q8UvJ1wvk

[Anonymous No.3580540]

>>3580471
I dont know if im "that" guy.
The whole thing about more dept vs. less spending was all over the news, thats why i mentioned it.

[Anonymous No.3580548]

Damn. If you think parties give a shit about science, you couldn't be more wrong. They care about power and money and how money are distributed once they get into power (especially to businesses where their people are most represented).

[Anonymous No.3580558]

>>3580540
It's spelled "debt".

[Anonymous No.3580564]

>But they dont really mention their stances on science.

Our parties don't need to have a "stance on science" because we don't have retarded creationists here, fellow krautbro.

[Anonymous No.3580572]

>>3580537
>mfw tyson shares my pragmatic perspective
fuck I love this guy

[Anonymous No.3580782]

So, they both dont care about science?

this cant be good, seriously...

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.3580815]

>>3580782
It isn't.

[Anonymous No.3580952]

>>3580782
How did the guy manage that with those oranges?!?! Do want.

[Anonymous No.3580981]

Republicans are anti-science and would prefer the bible to be taught in schools.

Democrats pay lip service to science but would rather money be spent on welfare to crack whores.

[Anonymous No.3580990]

>>3580952
cut oranges in half.

remove the flesh of the fruit.

pour yello in the empty peel halves.

let it set.

cut the halves into smaller sections,

serve,

avoid science career, as you lack any form of deducive reasoning.

[Anonymous No.3581028]

>>3580990
I was just saying it rhetorically, screw you.
But thanks. You know, if i had the ingredients in front of me, then maybe, however I'm on my laptop, on my bed thus nowhere near any of those supplies needed.
Yes, I mad, go fuck yourself.

[Anonymous No.3581042]

>>3581028

No, he's right. Only a fucking moron would have to ask how that was done. Please avoid any kind of science career, for the good of mankind.

[Anonymous No.3581059]

>>3581028
Nope, I don't think so. Reread your own post if you can't remember what is says. It is an outright question. Here, let me quote it for you.

>How did the guy manage that with those oranges?!?

And I am sorry, no backsies, you can't pretend like you knew how to do it or that you were trolololing. You Sir are of weak comprehension. End of story. Deal with it.

Now this is nothing to be upset about, it makes you fit right in here at /sci/.

[Anonymous No.3581064]

Neither party is pro-science, but only Republicans are actively anti-science.

[Anonymous No.3581062]

>>3580453
yeah, we've seen what "german" scientists can do to people

"pass" on a german scientist party, or anything like it

[Anonymous No.3581068]

>>3580782
i assume he did the same thing to 6 oranges

fill each with jello, let set, chill, slice, put 2 of each color on the plate

[Anonymous No.3581072]

>>3581068
i'm ever so sorry but occams razor does not let you assume more than three oranges. better that you also avoid science career.

[Anonymous No.3581078]

>>3580453
Democrat

To contrast, the leading contenders for the Republican presidential contest, Perry, Bachmann, etc. are all avid Creationists.

[Anonymous No.3581080]

As a general rule, Democrats are more in favor of science. This isn't to say that they're great. For instance, as we speak, they're gutting NASA. But, they're better than the Republicans, who actively oppose scientific advancement in a lot of areas over religious objections. Stem cell research, for instance, just can't get off the ground here, because the Republicans are rabidly opposed to it due to religious beliefs about the fetus being ensouled at conception. There's also a lot of school districts that can't be trusted to give your child a decent understanding of evolutionary theory, because Republican school board members push science teachers to push a thinly-disguised version of creationism.

[Anonymous No.3581082]

>>3580952
>>3580990
>>3581028
>>3581042
>>3581059

All you you are morons. The one, for having such exaggerated surprise at gelatin filled.

[Anonymous No.3581088]

>>3580537
I disagree with Tyson on one point, the funding allocation alone is not a clear indication of being pro-science. If the budget for NASA increased 500% for example it wouldn't mean anything if it was squandered on shit like muslim outreach. A more in depth review of what happens with the money is neccessary.

[Anonymous No.3581091]

>>3581072
you may be right
i may be crazy
but it just may be a lunatic you're searching for

[Anonymous No.3581092]

>>3581082 continues

*gelatin filled oranges, and those other guys for making such condescending responses.

[Anonymous No.3581101]

>>3581082
ah, how delightfully eloquent. a major accomplishment I'm sure. at least for someone of your limited capacity.

[Anonymous No.3581131]

>>3581101

More like I stopped paying attention to what I was writing because I don't give a fuck what I'm making if shit like you is who's reading it.

[Anonymous No.3581148]

just bumping to extend the shame of the following posters.
>>3580952
>>3581028
>>3581068
>>3581082
>>3581091
>>3581092
>>3581131

[Anonymous No.3581169]

>>3581148
>extend the shame
Like I'm feeling any.

[Anonymous No.3581196]

>>3581169
Most people would feel shame when caught with their pants down and a big donkey dildo up their ass. The stuff you wrote is on the level of that.

Shame on you.

[Anonymous No.3581225]

>>3581196

Yeah, wow, I'm feeling better and better about myself the more you go on.

[Anonymous No.3581239]

>>3581169
Yeah bro. You probably shold feel a bit bad. That was craptastically dumb. I could almost smell it thru my screen.

[Anonymous No.3581247]

Lets turn the tide! How about german politics and nuclear power?

[Anonymous No.3581265]

Neither of the two dominant parties are very pro-science. If he had to choose the lesser of two evil, we should go with democrats. Republicans however (Ron Paul namely) finally came to conclusion that war in the middle east is nothing more than a huge money drain, so they MIGHT be a better voting option right now. I must add that I strongly dislike republicans, but considering how deep the shit we're drowning in is, ending the war should be our top priority.
In other words, democrats will fuck up shit. Republicans hopefully won't. Science is not relevant in this case as if US goes bankrupt, science will surely be one of the fields to suffer the most.

[Anonymous No.3581270]

Science funding has generally been on the rise during Republican administration (and vice versa) in the past few decades.

Which probably outweighs the possibility of more crazy fundamentalist people being in the Republican party than with Democrats.

[Anonymous No.3581289]

>>3581265
>Republicans hopefully won't.

You're ignoring candidates like Bachmann and Perry who would probably slash all science funding except creation 'science'

[Anonymous No.3581297]

>>3581239

I was was distracted from what I was writing and then pressed submit when I looked back before I read what I had written because I already imagined out what I'm saying. I'd be sorry, but I don't feel like giving >>3581059 >>3581042 >>3581072 the satisfaction. In any case, I think the original direction of this thread is more important.

[Anonymous No.3581315]

>>3581148
lulz

poorfag with only 3 oranges, not boss with 6

i am shame

[Anonymous No.3581323]

>>3581289
Frankly, I don't live in the US anymore. I hear only very loosely about american politics and I'm not voluntarily searching for any info around it.
My opinions may be out of place and completely wrong. And they most probably are.

[Anonymous No.3581569]

>>3581062
>>3581247

I wasnt trying to pass the german parties as supperior, on the contrary: I was thinking about moving to the US to work at a research institute because here we are ruled by technophobe luddites.

Now german science on this other hand... (pic related)

[Anonymous No.3581591]

To be honest, a lot of stuff is stagnated in the US right now due to all the money going into other things. If a lab ever gets any kind of funding, their results are bastardized by using the lowest quality... compounds, elements, whatever. I'm not sure what to call it, but the quality of results is compromised because while the lab wants to make something that works, the people giving them money want something cheap that can bring in more money.

If tests are taking too long or don't seem like they'll yield any monetary result in the long run, funding is placed somewhere else.

[Anonymous No.3581602]

>>3581591
so, a profit motive has hit science

good

[Anonymous No.3581620]

>>3581265
Ron Paul's smart. He says he's a Republican, which is true because the original idea of a Republican is someone who believes in personal freedoms and less government power. Somewhere along the way to the present day, Republicans AND Democrats have lost their views and have become what they are now. They fuck around with policies that range from clearly unconstitutional to just a waste of money all because they ultimately are backed by someone who wants the established system to remain. So, Ron Paul is more like a Libertarian/old-America Republican.

[Anonymous No.3581626]

>>3581602
No, that's bad.

[Anonymous No.3581641]

>>3581591
no thats good it makes things more efficient, but the entire argument is nonsense anyway based on anecdote more than fact.

[Anonymous No.3581642]

>they dont really mention their stances on science.
They can't use science to increase their power or wealth or control the population with it. Hence why no politician care about it.

[Anonymous No.3581643]

>>3581626
for you, maybe

for society, no

[Anonymous No.3581645]

>>3581642
sure they can think of global warming or the recent ban of all nuclear energy in germany.

[Anonymous No.3581648]

let's think this through
most scientific research is defense related
republicans spend more money on defense related items
democrats cut defense funding first
so, if your goal is to vote the party that threatens science the most, vote democrat

[Anonymous No.3581663]

I keep up with politics pretty much. I don't think there a certain side that supports sciences more.

It really depends on the individual. Some democrats are very pro-science while others aren't; some republicans are very pro-science while others aren't.

[Anonymous No.3581667]

>>3581642
>implying politicians don't use psychology to exploit the gullible masses

[Anonymous No.3581674]

>>3581648
This. defense, military, and war spending always has positive results on science. Hell, 99% of the biggest technical advances are results from wars.

I say Republican. They also usually increase the NASA budget which is definitely good.

[Anonymous No.3581685]

Try to remember that a huge amount of the military's budget goes to health care and the procurement of weapons, not R&D. It would be nice if a bigger chunk, like the current expenditures for the two futile wars in progress, were reallocated to R&D.

[Anonymous No.3581691]

>>3581674
It doesn't have to be this way, and war isn't even necessarily the best way to drive science. If we have to pick an arbitrary direction to innovate, why not space mining or colonization?

[Anonymous No.3581697]

>>3581648
>>3581674

I love all that new technology that resulted from us bombing brown people for the past 10 years.

[Anonymous No.3581698]

>>3581674
>They also usually increase the NASA budget which is definitely good.
They just killed a bunch of satellites, including Hubble's successor, but that's the Tea Party's fault. Some get the value of NASA, even if they can't understand the scientific value of it:
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/93751-shelby-whacks-white-house-for-insane-nasa-
budget

[Anonymous No.3581705]

>>3581698
You have to remember, we're in a debt crisis right now. We barely escaped defaulting.

You also have to remember it was Obama that ended the shuttle missions.

[Anonymous No.3581707]

>>3581698
Wait, how is that the Tea Partier's fault? What did they do that lead to The successor to the Hubble being pulled?

[Anonymous No.3581717]

>>3581698
Did you even read the fucking article? They opposed the plan because it wasn't enough. They wanted MORE.

[Anonymous No.3581718]

>>3581707
hes just an astro turfer, a leftist because dawkins told him to be, a massive problem with science is that there i no profit motive in it and their should be then scientists would at least get payed more. Of course most scientist beg for government grants rather than try to find private funding but then again think about what happens when something is privately funded, people instantly scream corruption as if the government don't love reporting skewed results.

[Anonymous No.3581735]

>>3581718
Profit motive is the problem, not the absence of it basically boils down to.

>be awesome
>be rich
>pick one

[Anonymous No.3581740]

>>3581698
Holy shit you are retarded. Obama wanted to cut the constellation program. This also would have led to thousands of lost jobs. It also would lead to China and Russia taking over completely in manned space exploration.

Some facts:
>Shelby is a longtime supporter of NASA.
>the Constellation program, an effort to send astronauts to the moon and Mars that began under President George W. Bush.
>Democrats and Republicans alike said the 2011 budget request would cripple NASA and lead to thousands of lost jobs.
>“We cannot reinvent NASA every four years. Every new president can’t have a new NASA agenda,” she said.
>The president’s plan only ensures the United States will be subservient to and reliant on other countries for our access to space

[Anonymous No.3581809]

>>3581740
>The president’s plan only ensures the United States will be subservient to and reliant on other countries for our access to space

This reeks of emotion, just saying.

[Anonymous No.3581832]

I'd say only the Republicans have any sense in regards to biological reality, but one half is so greedy they don't care about how they damage the environment, and almost all of them are too dishonest or fearful to acknowledge the reality of race to others. Democrats lie compulsively and keep themselves pretty insulated from reality so they aren't reminded of how wrong their society theories are.

As for science itself, especially in the socio-biological realms the Jews have a lockdown on almost all of the facts of race. So what is discussed in anthropology NOW a days is literally science fiction.

[Anonymous No.3581851]

Republicans are. How can you do science when the country is destroyed?

[Anonymous No.3581852]

>>3581832
>Republicans have any sense in regards to biological reality
>Jews have a lockdown on almost all of the facts of race

[Anonymous No.3581853]

>>3581832
> republicans
> science
wow, what?

[Anonymous No.3581957]

>>3581853

Republicans like physics and engineering based science. They hate biology because it goes against the bible. Democrats are interestingly the opposite but they don't hate physics, only turned off by it. They like biology because the politicians hope that it would empower the justification of their social agendas, most notably the gay agenda. They want man sex to be legal by "scientific processes"

Both sides are equally bad with science and their understanding of it, politicians that is.

[Anonymous No.3582404]

Our parties in America do have to have a stance on science..But if I did just have to guess I would have to say the Democrats would be more pro science. Lots of Republicans and Religious ( Christians&Mormons)
Religion=fail