Krugman being Krugman

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

"There's the great line, of course, about how his "lived experience" (see? I told you, he's doing empirical work!) confirms that motivated cognition "is not, in fact, symmetric between liberals and conservatives.

...

That Krugman is too thick to see that one can't infer anything about the quality of partisans' reasoning from the truth or falsity of their beliefs is ... another element of Krugman's proof that ideological reasoning is symmetric across right and left!"

Comments

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Cause autism? Correlation and causation from you?
And a rational cost/benefit analysis of vaccination plays no part in the equation?

Frankenfoods, maybe...unproven as yet. Theorising ahead of our data. I may add that with the introduction of new vaccines or genetically modified crops I'm rather in favour of strict government oversight and legislation with companies having to demonstrate proper testing for such.

If it's new, make it jump through all the hoops first...and if it's really innovative, build new hoops for it to jump through. But at least give folk a chance to innovate and invent.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Cause autism? Correlation and causation from you?
And a rational cost/benefit analysis of vaccination plays no part in the equation?

That's literally what these loons believe, yes. And the anti-vax nonsense comes almost exclusively from the left.

Frankenfoods, maybe...unproven as yet.

No, no no no. The science is about as settled as it can get. The evidence is overwhelming at this point. GMO food is entirely safe.

You're kind of proving the point.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Name the congressman who supports antivax ala the way red team supports climate change denial. Shit, red teams congress people cant even decide if they evolved or not.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Hmm, if you were to cite Kucinich as a counter, you'd be right.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

"You're kind of proving the point."

Coming from the guy who frets about the "souls" of religious forced to pay for the sin of birth control, I think this was a low blow.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

He's advocating an unscientific point of view on a scientific issue.

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

Describe that POV again? There has to be oversight or else you cannot measure effects. He merely advocated for oversight.

Also, not all GMO's are inherently safe (http://www.nytimes.com/1998/02/14/world/gene-engineered-anthrax-is-it-a-weapon.html).

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

Again, I am completely unaware of a empirical source stating that "liberals" are more anti-vax than "conservatives." From what I've heard, conservative anti-vaxxers simply cite different reasoning for putting their own children and community in harm's way.

The science is about as settled as it can get. The evidence is overwhelming at this point. GMO food is entirely safe.

We've been down your denial road before, shaken out heads and turned back; but this is, once again, about the least nuanced "summation" of the issue that ignores very real objections.

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

I didn't say that liberals are more anti-vax. I was saying plenty of liberals are anti-vax, rabidly so. Hell there might be some rabid climate change deniers that are liberal but my impression not in any large percentage. Anti-vax appears to be a bipartisan thing with each side having slightly different reasons for being anti-vax. Conservative versus liberal: its about equal. But we do have them. That's the point.

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

and they are far more likely to be public about it. Fucking Huffington Post is anti-vax as is Bill Maher.

Huffington Post for gawds sake. In fact, HuffPo peddles a LOT of woo claptrap just as surely as Oprah and Dr Oz and Riki Lake do.

Now, which really known celebrity who is openly conservative promotes anti-vax? Cuz I can't think of any.

[goumindong.livejournal.com]

I am sorry what?

Here are the most recent articles on anti-vax from Huffpo.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/anti-vaccine-movement/

This is the most recent

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/24/anti-vaccine-movement-map_n_4654150.html

Either Huffpo rationally updated their information after being wrong or they're not ideological anti-vax.

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

I think HuffPo's format of occasionally letting folks write the content (like DailyKos) has bitten them on the behind vax-wise. A few years ago, it was, as NHY noted, pretty rabid.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

The science is about as settled as it can get. The evidence is overwhelming at this point. GMO food is entirely safe.

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/14/us/genetic-engineering-of-crops-can-spread-allergies-study-shows.html (http://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/14/us/genetic-engineering-of-crops-can-spread-allergies-study-shows.html)

Which is not quite the same as poisoning folk en masse, and the product never came to market, but this is one example why each GMO should be dealt with on a case by case basis.

[oslo.livejournal.com]

Exactly. Jeff's statement that "GMO food is entirely safe" is entirely unscientific. You can't just categorically conclude, based on evidence that's been done so far, that "GMO food is entirely safe"; all you can really say is that the kinds of GMO food that have been thoroughly tested to date have not been demonstrated to have materially significant deleterious effects on consumers. This might be suggestive that other forms of GMO food produced using the same alterations or methods would be similarly "safe," but it certainly does not show that any possible GMO food will prove to be just as "safe."

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

I know...it's just more ideological white noise.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

No, it's merely the scientific consensus. I know the European Union is terrible on this issue.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Just like it is scientific consensus that necessary safeguards remain in place.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

"Necessary safeguards," of course, do not encompass widespread bans based on false claims of safety.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

I'm from the UK...we're not quite as Luddite here: nevertheless, we don't mind you chaps going first. After you, old thing.

[oslo.livejournal.com]

There you go, Jeff. Continue to stamp your feet and insist that you're right. That's how you get the better of a debate: frustrate your interlocutors until they decide to stop engaging with you.

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

Sadly, it does seem to work. Even good parents get exhausted.