Scientific america endorses biden

Scientific American Endorses Joe Biden

Skip to comments.

Scientific American Endorses Joe Biden

Scientific American ^

| October 2020 Issue

| THE EDITORS

Posted on 09/16/2020 6:22:58 AM PDT by artichokegrower

click here to read article

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.

first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-74 next last

To: The Truth Will Make You Free

See FR thread: Scientific American backs Biden in its 1st presidential endorsement.

That was a good one as well.

41

posted on 09/16/2020 6:49:09 AM PDT

by Mr Ramsbotham

("God is a spirit, and man His means of walking on the earth.")

To: artichokegrower

No surprise here, they endorsed a fossil.

42

posted on 09/16/2020 6:50:08 AM PDT

by Kenny500c

To: I want the USA back

“...and was going to cut funding.”

And there, ladies and gentlemen, is why we should hesitate to believe science is “settled”.

43

posted on 09/16/2020 6:52:54 AM PDT

by ripnbang

("An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man, a subject.")

To: Kenny500c

14 Sept: Breitbart: Junk Science Founder: Biden Climate Speech ‘One Falsehood After Another’

by Dr. Susan Berry

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/14/junk-science-founder-biden-climate-speech-one-falsehood-after-another/

15 Sept: Breitbart: Millionaire Democrat Donor Says Joe Biden Will Be Good for Wall Street

by John Binder

Michael Novogratz, the former Goldman Sachs executive and hedge fund manager, told CNBC in an interview that while a Biden win against President Donald Trump may initially drag the market down, Wall Street will stand to benefit.

“I think Biden’s going to win. I hope Biden wins, ” said Novogratz, who now runs an investment firm. “But if he wins, I think the market will go down, at least initially because he’s going to raise capital gains tax he’s going to raise corporate taxes some and he’s going to raise personal income tax.”

“I think it’s probably better for the markets [if Biden wins] because the chaos Trump brings every week, every day just gets tiring, ” Novogratz said.

Novogratz donated $200, 000 to the Biden Action Fund in June.

Despite endorsements from Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Novogratz said Biden and running mate Sen. Kamala Harris’s (D-CA) platform “sounds a lot more conservative than the Republican team when you’re talking about their plans.”

“There’s going to be so much pressure to start redistributing wealth whether it’s paying for college, paying for loans, if it’s Medicare for All, ” Novogratz said. “Those are things the Democrat Party cares about and there’s going to be pressure and maybe we’re not going to get all of those but we’ll be heading in that direction. So I don’t see our deficits miraculously collapsing.”...

This month, Biden touted Wall Street’s support for his plan to abolish America’s suburbs by seizing control of local zoning laws to construct housing developments and multi-family buildings in neighborhoods. Likewise, Wall Street is fully behind Biden’s plan to hugely expand legal immigration levels, beyond already historical highs at 1.2 million green cards and 1.4 million visa workers a year.

The Biden-Harris ticket has elated Wall Street so much that for the first time in a decade, more financial executives are donating to the Democrat candidates than Republicans, the latest Center for Responsive Politics analysis reveals.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/15/millionaire-democrat-donor-biden-wall-street/

12 Sept: Manhatan Contrarian: Scientific American Goes Full Anti-Science

by Francis Menton

In recent years Scientific American has somehow gotten itself into the position of defending the truth of many such non-falsifiable claims, but most notably in its strenuous advocacy of climate change alarmism. How to reconcile such advocacy with the use of the term “Scientific” in its title? If you are wondering how that could even be attempted, check out the piece in the current issue by a guy named Mano Singham, with the title and sub-title, “The Idea That a Scientific Theory Can Be ‘Falsified’ Is a Myth; It’s time we abandoned the notion.” Singham is identified as a member of the American Physical Society, and is apparently a retired professor from Case Western Reserve University...

It is beyond explanation how the editors of this once-prestigious publication, with the term “Scientific” in its name, could have so completely lost track of what makes science science. And then to top it off, they call the people who actually understand what science is “anti-science.”

My message to the editors is this: The proponents of climate change alarmism, if they want to make any kind of legitimate claim to the mantle of “science, ” need to specify the falsifiable hypothesis that they claim has been established, and also the evidence which, if it emerged, they would agree had falsified the hypothesis. Until they do that, their assertions have no more claim to the label of “established science” than does my hypothesis that my going to bed is what causes the sun to come up the next morning. Those of us who understand what the scientific method is are onto the climate scammers. As for Scientific American, your reputation at this point is beyond rehabilitation.

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2020-9-11-scientific-american-goes-anti-science

44

posted on 09/16/2020 6:53:23 AM PDT

by MAGAthon

To: artichokegrower

So... Scientific American is now officially neither?

45

posted on 09/16/2020 6:53:48 AM PDT

by FormerLib

(Sacrificing our land and our blood cannot buy protection from jihad.-Bishop Artemije of Kosovo)

To: Mr Rogers

I just checked out their FB page & the elitist consensus there is that this is a great decision.

To: artichokegrower

SA ceased to be a legitimate science publication 40 years ago.

47

posted on 09/16/2020 6:55:10 AM PDT

by MeanWestTexan

(Sometimes There Is No Lesser Of Two Evils)

To: artichokegrower

C’mon, man! That’s not very SCIENCE-tiffic!!!

48

posted on 09/16/2020 6:55:49 AM PDT

by a fool in paradise

(Joe Biden- "First thing I'd do is repeal those Trump tax cuts." (May 4th, 2019))

To: artichokegrower

>>Wonder if these egg head scientists would be so supportive of a total shut down if their taxpayer funded university salaries and benefits were eliminated?

How many of them take money from the Chinese Government?

49

posted on 09/16/2020 6:56:27 AM PDT

by a fool in paradise

(Joe Biden- "First thing I'd do is repeal those Trump tax cuts." (May 4th, 2019))

To: coloradan

The implication of the text is that 190, 000 fewer, i.e. zero, would have died, except for his “inept response”. But, this is obviously a lie, as no response would have attained zero deaths

This doesn’t make sense. Are you missing a NOT? (e.g. “...as no response would NOT have attainted zero deaths)

50

posted on 09/16/2020 6:57:54 AM PDT

by nonsporting

(.Only hits count.)

To: coloradan

>>“The most devastating example is his dishonest and inept response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which cost more than 190, 000 Americans their lives by the middle of September.”

Which death was the first one that was Trump’s fault?

Should he have locked down cities in February while Democrat mayors were whooping it up in the streets/public in Houston, New Orleans, San Francisco, New York?

Should he have closed borders in January?

If we don’t stop the initial deaths, then are the first deaths not Trump’s fault?

“His inept response... which cost (caused)...”

Where is the proof of causality? This is not science.

51

posted on 09/16/2020 6:59:53 AM PDT

by a fool in paradise

(Joe Biden- "First thing I'd do is repeal those Trump tax cuts." (May 4th, 2019))

To: Sans-Culotte

Slow Joe can’t even name the 3 genders.

52

posted on 09/16/2020 7:00:37 AM PDT

by a fool in paradise

(Joe Biden- "First thing I'd do is repeal those Trump tax cuts." (May 4th, 2019))

To: Dr. Scarpetta

>>I just checked out their FB page & the elitist consensus there is that this is a great decision.

How many of the bot comments are by Chi-Coms working on their social credit score?

53

posted on 09/16/2020 7:02:20 AM PDT

by a fool in paradise

(Joe Biden- "First thing I'd do is repeal those Trump tax cuts." (May 4th, 2019))

To: nonsporting

Wikipedia: Scientific American

Publisher: Springer Nature is an American German academic publishing company created by the May 2015 merger of Springer Science+Business Media and Holtzbrinck Publishing Group’s Nature Publishing Group, Palgrave Macmillan, and Macmillan Education. The company made revenues of €1.72 billion in 2019.

15 Sept: The Diplomat: China, EU Leaders Hold ‘Intense’ Virtual Meeting

by Shannon Tiezzi

On Monday, Chinese President Xi Jinping held a virtual meeting with European Council President Charles Michel, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel...

According to Michel, the meeting addressed “four key topics”: climate change, economic and trade issues, “international affairs and human rights, ” and “COVID-19 and economic recovery.”

The video call was a sharply downgraded version of what was once planned as a massive in-person summit to be held in Leipzig, Germany this September, bringing together Xi and the heads of state of all 27 EU member countries. The summit – and a long-dreamed-of bilateral investment treaty between China and the EU, known as the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI) — was to be the crowning achievement of Germany’s rotating presidency of the Council of the EU. But the in-person summit was cancelled months ago, officially due to the coronavirus pandemic...

The two sides also agreed to set up “high level dialogues” on the environment and climate as well as digital issues. The environment is an issue of much friction between Europe and the United States, as the Trump administration has withdrawn the country from the Paris climate agreement and consistently downplays the threat of climate change. Thus seeking cooperation on climate action is one of Germany’s key priorities for relations with China, according to a top German diplomat for the Asia-Pacific...

In another topic Beijing would be keen to downplay, Michel and von der Leyen also stressed the need for China to provide full cooperation for an international investigation of the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic – a sensitive topic for China, given the virus’ initial emergence in Wuhan...

https://thediplomat.com/2020/09/china-eu-leaders-hold-intense-virtual-meeting/

54

posted on 09/16/2020 7:02:42 AM PDT

by MAGAthon

To: artichokegrower

I cancelled Scientific American years ago.....not worth my time.

55

posted on 09/16/2020 7:04:11 AM PDT

by originalbuckeye

('In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act'- George Orwell..?)

To: coloradan

>>The implication of the text is that 190, 000 fewer, i.e. zero, would have died, except for his “inept response”. But, this is obviously a lie, as no response would have attained zero deaths.

There are thousands who would still be dead by their primary ailment, “with measurable traces of Covid19” be damned.

And think of all of the Americans who did NOT die by medical mishap (a leading of death in America, normally about #3). Staying out of hospitals can save your life.

56

posted on 09/16/2020 7:04:34 AM PDT

by a fool in paradise

(Joe Biden- "First thing I'd do is repeal those Trump tax cuts." (May 4th, 2019))

To: artichokegrower

I stopped subscribing to Scientific American ten years or more ago although I have been a scientists for most of my adult life.

57

posted on 09/16/2020 7:04:39 AM PDT

by Hiddigeigei

("Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish, " said Dionysus - Euripides)

To: artichokegrower

Why are they endorsing anybody?

Corrupt magazine.

58

posted on 09/16/2020 7:05:14 AM PDT

by Moonman62

(http://www.freerepublic.com/~moonman62/)

To: MAGAthon

***the continuing farce that China is a “climate” leader:

11 Sept: China Dialogue: What are the prospects of an EU–China climate deal?

Ahead of the EU–China leaders’ call on 14 September, the EU is looking to China for strong climate targets

by Byford Tsang, Jennifer Tollmann

Although trade will be the focus of the EU–China leaders’ call on 14 September, it would be a mistake to think climate is off the summit’s agenda or unimportant in the broader relationship...

***Unspoken, but not forgotten in the European debate is growing concern over China’s reawakening coal habit. If China completes all the coal power plants it is currently building and plans to build, the lifetime emissions from these projects would be equal to nearly seven times the EU’s annual emissions...

https://chinadialogue.net/en/climate/what-are-the-prospects-of-an-eu-china-climate-deal/

59

posted on 09/16/2020 7:08:13 AM PDT

by MAGAthon

To: Eric in the Ozarks

I don’t know but those publications are joined at the hip with ‘Academia’.

‘Researchers’ who get published garner the most laughably fawning reverence from the goofiest crowd of toadies you ever saw! It hardly even matters WHAT they ‘researched’. They constantly court that kind of thing. Mention of their names and projects in periodicals and other news outlets is a sure way for them to get consideration for grants and funds.

I also don’t trust these people because when their ‘research’ is found to be fraudulent, plagiarized or otherwise irregular, not nearly enough is ever publicized about THAT.

60

posted on 09/16/2020 7:11:35 AM PDT

by SMARTY

('Calling a thing by its right name is the beginning of wisdom.')

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.

first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-74 next last

Disclaimer:

Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual

posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its

management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the

exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson