Only 6% of scientists are Reps. 55 Dems 32 Libs.

**min0 lee** · 12-10-2010, 06:58 AM

http://www.slate.com/id/2277104?wpisrc=obinsite

Lab Politics
Most scientists in this country are Democrats. That's a problem.
By Daniel Sarewitz
Posted Wednesday, Dec. 8, 2010, at 10:41 AM ET

It is no secret that the ranks of scientists and engineers in the United States include dismal numbers of Hispanics and African-Americans, but few have remarked about another significantly underrepresented group: Republicans.
No, this is not the punch line of a joke. A Pew Research Center Poll from July 2009 showed that only around 6 percent of U.S. scientists are Republicans; 55 percent are Democrats, 32 percent are independent, and the rest "don't know" their affiliation.

This immense imbalance has political consequences. When President Obama appears Wednesday on Discovery Channel's Mythbusters (9 p.m. ET), he will be there not just to encourage youngsters to do their science homework but also to reinforce the idea that Democrats are the party of science and rationality. And why not? Most scientists are already on his side. Imagine if George W. Bush had tried such a stunt—every major newspaper in the country would have run an op-ed piece by some Nobel Prize winner asking how the guy who prohibited stem-cell research and denied climate change could have the gall to appear on a program that extols the power of scientific thinking.
Yet, partisan politics aside, why should it matter that there are so few Republican scientists? After all, it's the scientific facts that matter, and facts aren't blue or red
Well, that's not quite right. Consider the case of climate change, of which beliefs are astonishingly polarized according to party affiliation and ideology. A March 2010 Gallup poll showed that 66 percent of Democrats (and 74 percent of liberals) say the effects of global warming are already occurring, as opposed to 31 percent of Republicans. Does that mean that Democrats are more than twice as likely to accept and understand the scientific truth of the matter? And that Republicans are dominated by scientifically illiterate yahoos and corporate shills willing to sacrifice the planet for short-term economic and political gain?

Or could it be that disagreements over climate change are essentially political—and that science is just carried along for the ride? For 20 years, evidence about global warming has been directly and explicitly linked to a set of policy responses demanding international governance regimes, large-scale social engineering, and the redistribution of wealth. These are the sort of things that most Democrats welcome, and most Republicans hate. No wonder the Republicans are suspicious of the science.

more

**min0 lee** · 12-10-2010, 07:04 AM

May be why they are so dead against the scientific consensus on global warming.

**min0 lee** · 12-10-2010, 07:06 AM

They were Republicans....

**min0 lee** · 12-10-2010, 07:10 AM

Maybe most Republicans gear more towards business and law...

**Big Smoothy** · 12-10-2010, 07:14 AM

Lab Politics
Most scientists in this country are Democrats. That's a problem.

We need to see data on this.

What percentage of scientists were polled?

How many are Independents?

How many are NON-political?

What is the DEFINITION of a scientist?

What in the hell does a political party have to do with anything?

This is a joke.

**min0 lee** · 12-10-2010, 07:47 AM

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

We need to see data on this.

What percentage of scientists were polled?

How many are Independents?

How many are NON-political?

What is the DEFINITION of a scientist?

What in the hell does a political party have to do with anything?

This is a joke.

Spending on research for one....

**min0 lee** · 12-10-2010, 07:50 AM

Public Praises Science; Scientists Fault Public, Media: Overview - Pew Research Center for the People & the Press

**bio-chem** · 12-10-2010, 08:04 AM

science has been tainted by politics for a long time now. and i think that can be traced back to the atom bomb. previous to that scientists were more about discovery for the sake of discovery, thomas edison types. now with scientific discovery funded so much by the government you have to dance with the woman who brought you so to speak. your science needs to prove whatever your benefactor wants it to prove or you don't have funding anymore. truth is the same thing in business. you see it all the time in drug development. everytime a study comes out, another study comes out to dispute its findings. as a guy who spent his undergrad in chemistry i find it sad

**Big Smoothy** · 12-10-2010, 08:20 AM

^ and ^^ the spending on research is heavily politicized yes, and controlled.

Remember the stem-cell research?

**bio-chem** · 12-10-2010, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

^ and ^^ the spending on research is heavily politicized yes, and controlled.

Remember the stem-cell research?

I'm sorry, what was your point?

**Zaphod** · 12-10-2010, 11:35 AM

Let's hope those republican numbers in the scientific community stay low. If they grow to be the majority we'll be back to the dark ages, complete with an inquisition and witch burnings.

**bio-chem** · 12-10-2010, 11:48 AM

Originally Posted by Zaphod

Let's hope those republican numbers in the scientific community stay low. If they grow to be the majority we'll be back to the dark ages, complete with an inquisition and witch burnings.

this is the dumbest shit ive read here in awhile. and that is quite the accomplishment

**Zaphod** · 12-10-2010, 04:02 PM

Originally Posted by bio-chem

this is the dumbest shit ive read here in awhile. and that is quite the accomplishment

I'm sorry. In the future I'll run all my comments by you first.

**clemson357** · 12-10-2010, 04:23 PM

The poll results are probably a result of the fact that liberals are elitists and thus more likely to inflate their job title. If you ask any given engineer whether he considers himself a "scientist," I'd bet liberal engineers are more likely to say "yes."

Also, it is well known that academia is exceedingly liberal. I'd bet their are a bunch of social science and liberal arts professors who fancy themselves as "scientists." I'd bet that loud mouth "African American Studies" professor who was the subject of Obama's Beer summit last year considers himself a "scientist." Lol.

**GearsMcGilf** · 12-10-2010, 04:41 PM

For what it's worth. A chemistry professor of mine also said that our grandchildren would be picking up tarballs out of the gulf of Mexico because of the BP spill. A great # of researchers work for state universities and seek grants from the Fed govt, so it's no surprise that most of them would vote democrat. Similarly, the dem party is also friendly to to the national trial lawyers association, so if I were a trial lawyer, I'd probably also support the party that supported my industry. This finding neither takes away nor lends no credibility to the global warming movement.

**min0 lee** · 12-10-2010, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by clemson357

The poll results are probably a result of the fact that liberals are elitists and thus more likely to inflate their job title.

Back in the day I used to clean dirty toilets at airports....to some I was just a turd choker but I saw myself as the East Coast Environmental Custodial Engineer and I just got a kick from your reply.

**min0 lee** · 12-10-2010, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by clemson357

I'd bet that loud mouth "African American Studies" professor who was the subject of Obama's Beer summit last year considers himself a "scientist." Lol.

**Zaphod** · 12-10-2010, 04:45 PM

Originally Posted by min0 lee

to some I was just a turd choker

**bio-chem** · 12-10-2010, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by Zaphod

I'm sorry. In the future I'll run all my comments by you first.

i will be sure to approve or reject all potential posts within 24 hours. make sure you PM me with "delete to trash" as the subject line.

**Dark Geared God** · 12-11-2010, 02:29 AM

Originally Posted by min0 lee

Back in the day I used to clean dirty toilets at airports....to some I was just a turd choker but I saw myself as the East Coast Environmental Custodial Engineer and I just got a kick from your reply.

I hope you enjoyed unclogging the crappers that i clogged

**min0 lee** · 12-11-2010, 06:50 AM

Originally Posted by Dark Geared God

I hope you enjoyed unclogging the crappers that i clogged

I heard your a squirter.

**Dark Geared God** · 12-11-2010, 02:31 PM

Originally Posted by min0 lee

I heard your a squirter.

Nope turdberg

**bandaidwoman** · 12-14-2010, 08:21 AM

We know non -directed research ( doing research for the sake of it) is far superior to directed research. For instance, the technology in the Hubble space telescope is now being used for digital mammograms, a oceanographer studying how thermal bacteria replicated in hot water vents led to the polymerase chain reaction machine that has revolutionized medicine and molecular biology.

Guess who funds the "non-directed" research? The government. I don't see republicans lobbying for more tax money to go into this kind of research.

Most medical researchers like myself favor NIH sponsered medical research over those fundered by private companies, the latter has a vested interest in suppressing negative data and inflating positive data. I know because I used to be a chemist for one. I am studying why LADA or adult onset type I diabetes happens and no private company will fund that kind of research, only the tax subsidized research entities.

Most scientists may have jumped ship over to democrats when the vocal republicans are against teaching evolution, a scientific theory that has thousands of lines of evidence even over the best theory of gravity , which is currently general relativity. Since 98% of scientists in the academy are self proclaimed athiests like myself, that could be another reason since democrats tend to be less religious, although there are republican athiests.

Though tax monies fund our research most of us are not getting rich over it. I am financially comfortable due to my private practice and business ventures. If I was a pure researcher my income would not even qualify as middle income, so many pure research scientists are financially strapped and this may also affect their political leanings, not that they are dependant on social programs but understand that they are not too far off from welfare programs if their funding were to be stripped away from them.

I hang out at the physics forum, http://www.physicsforums.com/index.php
that's a good place to ask why most scientists are democrats, ( by the way, most on that forum are so I believe this statistic is valid).

Yes, I am a geek.

Thread: Only 6% of scientists are Reps. 55 Dems 32 Libs.

Thread Tools

Display

Only 6% of scientists are Reps. 55 Dems 32 Libs.

Still the same.

Similar Threads

Very good video about reps/dems and Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac

Dems seek a further $56 billion

Are Dems screwing themselves?

Kerry at odds with Dems & Repubs in South

Posting Permissions