September 29, 2016

5 ways the Left are anti-science

Lauren SouthernRebel Commentator

The right is accused of being anti-science often due to skepticism about global warming. Whether you agree with this critique or not, it's undeniable that anti-science behavior is found on both sides of the political spectrum.

Right now, I would argue that the regressive left and not the right have a mainstream monopoly on that behavior.

From fat positivity to hatred towards nuclear reactors, the left have their fair share of ridiculous anti-science views.

PS: Check out my show “Stand Off,” only available to Premium Members of

You also get access to shows by Ezra Levant, Gavin McInnes and more. We've even got THREE different membership levels. Find out more HERE.

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-10-01 13:04:05 -0400
Lauren, GMO is fine, I just want to know when I’m eating it, so I can choose not to if I so desire.
commented 2016-10-01 12:59:06 -0400
An academic with no life experience is as stupid as a stick. That seems to be the kind of ‘educated’ liberal Andrew is talking about. Professional students don’t make for informed voters, its a fact.
commented 2016-10-01 01:33:27 -0400
Stephenson. Oh the irony of your post!! LOL!!! Your theory is so simplistic, it’s down right anti-scientific!! Ppl with an education are smart, those without, are stupid. Actually, it has to do with applying life experience, which Lefty’s like you clearly don’t have, and it’s one’s willingness to be truly objective, and one’s natural ability to disseminate information, which clearly, you don’t have. You’re so pathetic I can’t even accuse you have suffering “fancy theory”.
commented 2016-10-01 01:05:38 -0400
Edward. Thks for the links. I’ve questioned Darwin for years. Like how come some apes didn’t evolve, but stayed apes? And how come there aren’t some half man/half apes “in transition” now? How come we’ve never found the elusive half man/ape? Is it ‘cause it never happened? It’s gratifying to know some heavy duty scientists critique it too.
commented 2016-10-01 00:40:06 -0400
Excellent Lauren – you da man!!
commented 2016-09-30 11:35:28 -0400
I watched with interest the debate between Intelligent design advocates and Darwinists. With one side accusing the Intelligent design of being nothing more than creationism in a cheap suit and claiming it’s origin was in Michael Behe’s book Dawin’s Black box yet Michael Behe attributed his interest in the topic to the book by agnostic Michael Denton’s evolution a theory in crisis. As the debate unfolded over the years the one side Darwinian side tried to denounce the other as not scientific by claiming they had no peer reviewed journals or books so when they did produce some such as Stephen C. Meyer’s signature of the cell they claimed it wasn’t about Intelligent design to which Stephen C. Meyer responded " I ought to know what it is about after all I did write the book". for added interest the agnostic David Berlinski challenges Darwinian presuppositions.
commented 2016-09-30 09:32:39 -0400
“OH you mean the idiots from the Universities and the left who think they are scientists but have no more claim to that title than any schmoe off the street.”

A scientist is someone who holds an advanced degree, generally a doctorate, and who conducts independent, experimental research, typically measured by publications in scientific journals. So, yes, faculty and research staff at the university level are in fact scientists, while Joe Schmoe who drives a forklift at the Sears warehouse is not.

Guess who probably voted for Harper, and who voted for Trudeau? Studies in the Canadian context are rare and hard to find, but when they are conducted, do show that people with postgraduate degrees (as scientists almost invariably do) are, on average, among the strongest Liberal supporters around.
commented 2016-09-30 09:02:07 -0400
Glenn Craig said, “But if you think windmills and solar arrays are not cost effective….do a cost benefit analysis of nuclear plants like I did in business school …”

What’s wrong with your thesis is that no one claimed nuclear power was cost effective, only that it is cleaner and has the ability to provide enough power and a steady stream of power.
commented 2016-09-30 08:57:06 -0400
Andrew Stephensen said, “Ask the political leanings of any scientist. I suspect you’ll find that the majority voted for Trudeau.”

Which, if true (and I have my doubts on that), just proves that higher level education does not equate to wisdom.
commented 2016-09-30 02:55:51 -0400
Andrew you mean like those SCIENTISTS who did not feel the need for an ice breaker as their scientific minds reasoned that there was no ice to get caught in? How did that work out?
commented 2016-09-30 02:54:15 -0400
Andrew i doubt it, OH you mean the idiots from the Universities and the left who think they are scientists but have no more claim to that title than any schmoe off the street. And if scientists voted for a halfwit like Justin then what does that say about them?
commented 2016-09-30 02:51:54 -0400
Arlene May GMO means far more than than one issue, hope you stop using canola, it is a GMO.
commented 2016-09-30 00:12:42 -0400
Lauren I am going to dissent on one of your five. But from the outset I will say that nuclear power is still something I am OK with. I could compose a post graduate thesis on this subject but I will make it brief. As a business investment there is no way that a nuclear power plant is economically justifyable based on the assumption that electricity is it’s primary product.

Having said that I will point out that the stacks painted like Olive Oil’s stockings at Tufft’s Cove (that you see in the background of Trailer Park Boys episodes) put enough radioactive fallout into the atmosphere to shut down Point Lapreau many times over when it was burning Cape Breton coal that is highly laden with uranium.

The primary product of nuclear reactors is plutonium 241. Weapon grade plutonium has a half life of approximately 14 years. You are going to generate a lot of heat when you make it so you might as well use that heat to generate steam for electricity….but do not be naieve….electricity is a by-product.The construction and decomissioning of nuclear plants co-incides with arms race and disarmament.

I have no illusions as to why the “medical isotopes” facility at Chalk River is located inside the wire at CFB Pettiwawa.

But in much the same way that I believe “gun free” zones are safe spaces for mass killers “nuclear free” countries are kill zones for rogue states with nukes. Just like the dirty little secret of granddad’s unregistered shot gun in the attic….there are many more countries with nuclear capability in the world than would ever be honestly declared at the UN…..and Canada is one of them. I am more than OK with that.

But if you think windmills and solar arrays are not cost effective….do a cost benefit analysis of nuclear plants like I did in business school …..but if you factor in what the primary product actually is….it is so much cheaper than battallions of cannon fodder as a deterrent.
commented 2016-09-29 23:14:17 -0400
Andrew Stephenson – more unprovable rot – just like climate hysteria, social licence, diversity, identity politics and most other accepted on speculative faith Leftish extremist dogmas
commented 2016-09-29 20:40:14 -0400
The only science that the Left are against, is science that cannot be turned into a Tax Grab.

They are really treading on thin ice, with Global Warming.
commented 2016-09-29 20:38:45 -0400
Transgenic Wars", an award-winning film by French journalist Paul Moreira, takes us on a journey through Europe and Latin America, looking at the effects of GM crops on livestock and human health

People can watch Paul Moreira’s film for free via ’til the end of September:

Science requires that research go wherever the path leads without preconceived ideas of what is or is not going to be accepted as an answer. A lot of the research is directed at glyphosate for which gmo’s were designed. The old claims of no harm are becoming increasingly suspect. This pesticide which the WHO has declared a possible carcinogen is sprayed on Canadian and American grain crops within 7-14 days of harvest. Almost everything we eat has glyphosate residue. Up until recently they didn’t even look for glyphosate. There are still more questions than answers but for me the history of Monsanto does not generate any confidence that they or the minions they control will give any answer contrary to their profits. Europe has rejected GMO’s but Bayer is presently in the process of trying to buy Monsanto. Raises a whole lot of new questions. I will simply avoid GMO’s and try to keep glyphosate ingestion to a minimum…just in case.
commented 2016-09-29 20:09:47 -0400
Ask the political leanings of any scientist. I suspect you’ll find that the majority voted for Trudeau.
commented 2016-09-29 19:56:42 -0400
Lauren, you are so full of common sense and intelligence. I love watching your videos and your show.
commented 2016-09-29 19:38:29 -0400
It might be more accurate to say that Left wing social dogmas are largely based on fallacious premises and the science they are prone to accept on faith alone (as they do social constructs) is similarly flawed by fallacious premises.

As a matter of the spread of these bad/false ideas, if you think of the human mind as a computer it is a matter of garbage in, garbage out. However this explanation for the popular acceptance of bad/false ideas being a matter of external/repetative programming, falls down when you consider the thing which sets us apart from computers is the capacity to reason – the ability to process input data and test its validity through analytical logical rationality. The capacity for, and level of, your ability to reason is also a genetic.

You cannot LEARN to reason – you are born with as little or as much capacity for reason as you will ever have – you can only learn to reason more efficiently.

Which brings us back to the question of why unreasoning acceptance of illogical ideas is so widespread in the left – it probably has more to do with genetics than they think.
commented 2016-09-29 19:29:57 -0400
The whole GMO issue, along with farmed fish, proves the champagne socialists are racists. To put the final nail in that coffin is how they are opposed to 3rd world countries having access to effective energy sources, notably carbon based.