The Right and Left Use Science Only When it Fits Their Agenda


Everyone has heard some sort of debate on climate change. Whether it’s cause is human or natural, how fast it’s occurring or if we can change the direction of it. one thing is totally clear, science has proven that climate change is occurring and has been for some time.

This is science, not conjecture. There are tons of articles, research papers, and data findings that support this. One website is NASA’s Climate Change site. But maybe you believe that NASA is fake and the moon landing never happened or you are a flat-earther, don’t fret, there are plenty of other sources to educate yourself about the FACT that climate change is real. Justfacts.com is one such source. But please, don’t rely on just the web, your local library is full of factual writings, teachings and books on the matter.

The question I have is why/how can a scientific fact be used only when it fits a particular agenda? Have been following the recent Trump protests and found that the right and left are unsure of what a fact is. Fact – climate change, not a fact – Ted Cruz’s father was part of the JFK assassination, that is a) moronic and B) a conspiracy theory.

We Love Science Protest Sign

People hold signs as they listen to a group of scientists speak during a rally in conjunction with the American Geophysical Union’s fall meeting Tuesday, Dec. 13, 2016, in San Francisco. The rally was to call attention to what scientist believe is unwarranted attacks by the incoming Trump administration against scientists advocating for the issue of climate change and its impact. (AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez)

The previous photo shows signs from a December 2016 rally in San Francisco against the then incoming Trump administration who some say view science as a joke. The full article can be found here Lab coats vs. climate change: Scientists rally for research.

The left seems to be well cemented in embracing  science, after all, it’s a fact that the world is round (spherical), summer is hot, winter is cold, water freezes at 32 degrees and climate change is occurring. One would then be able to assume the right understands the evolution from a hypothesis to a fact and therefore will accept the findings of the scientific world’s hard work as it tries to unravel the universes many mysteries as well as develop new technologies to help mankind.

But one only has to watch the recent women’s march to see this is not the case at all. The following photo is of a Connecticut rally on Inauguration Day, 2016, from the ctpost article titled Rallies, parties planned in Connecticut around Inauguration Day.

.Just a quick look at the signs, and there seems to be major conflicts happening.

  • #Not My President: Factually, he is your President. The United States held an election and Mr. Trump defeated Mrs. Clinton by means of winning the Electoral College, which in fact, is how someone needs to win an election for the President of the United States. The Constitution decries this. Don’t like it? Start a movement to amend it.The “#” sort of makes the sign legit in that it’s a fact there is/was a hashtag on social media equal to the sign.
  • Womens Rights are Human Rights: This is a dead on fact, a woman is a human, science states this as a fact.
  • DumpTrump: Not a fact, an opinion.
  • Too Hot I’m Dying with a drawing of the Earth : This is a 1/2 fact. The earth is in fact warming, but all research points to the earth being able to survive the warming. Science has research that leads to the possibility that we too will survive, or at least some of us. It’s not clear whether “I’m Dying” is the earth or the person holding the sign’s view. So 1/2 fact it is.
  • Mind Your Own Uteros:  Factually this sign is a huge issue. If the statement being made is that those humans that have them must tend to their own, it’s 1/2 correct. 1/2 correct in that not every human who has one is a physician and therefore not every uteros bearing human can truly tend to their own.
  • I feel though that the real message has to do with Roe v Wade. Again, turning to science which the right seems to embrace, this would be factually wrong. Science has proven that life begins at conception, as stated on the princeton webpage “Life Begins at Fertalization”. Many other forms of publications cover this as well, almost more than climate change. This is important because in the United States, and most of the civilized world,  it is against the law to take a life, including your own. 
  • The Future is Nasty: 100% not factual, unless you have built a time machine and traveled to the future.
  • I Stand With Immigrants: 100% factual as 99% of us are descendants of immigrants.

So how can people toss aside scientific fact when it serves them to do so and embrace it when it also serves them best? Facts are facts and should not be used only when convenient or when they fit someones agenda.

Historically the right has been pro-climate change and pro-choice.

Historically the left has been anti-climate change and pro-life.

Neither can or does embrace science equally on these two topics, and many more to be honest.

Part of the problem with the American divide is that neither side can agree on a starting point. If only we can set down some sort of basic, underlying facts and then attempt to provide arguments based off of those facts, maybe we can come together a bit more than where we are now.

Also a contributing factor is the growing “me” movement rather than the “we” of old. Lost are the days of being American first, and all else second. The greatest generation (the one that stopped Hitler and Japan), understood it’s “we” before “me”, just take a stroll through Arlington to prove that fact. If they didn’t, we’d all be speaking German or Japanese at this moment.

We need to come together as a country, as a nation. A unified America is a strong America. Together there is nothing we can not overcome.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*