Liberals: They Blinded Us With Science

Pages: 1 2

In response to my column last week about hormesis — the theory that some radiation can be beneficial to humans — liberals reacted with their usual open-minded examination of the facts.

According to Noel Sheppard at Newsbusters, MSNBC’s Ed Schultz devoted an entire segment to denouncing me. He called me toxic, accused me of spreading misinformation and said I didn’t care about science.

One thing Schultz did not do, however, was cite a single physicist or scientific study.

I cited three physicists by name as well as four studies supporting hormesis in my column. For the benefit of liberals scared of science, I even cited The New York Times.

It tells you something that the most powerful repudiation of hormesis Schultz could produce was the fact that a series of government agencies have concluded — I quote — that “insufficient human data on hormesis exists.”

Well, in that case, I take it all ba -– wait, no. That contradicts nothing I said in my column.

Liberals should take up their quarrel with the physicists cited by both me and the Times. I’m sure the Harvard physics department will be fascinated to discover that the left’s idea of the scientific method is to cling to their fears while hurling invective at anyone who proposes a novel thesis.

The fact that liberals are so terrified of science that they chronically wet themselves wouldn’t be half as annoying if they didn’t go around boasting about their deep respect for science, especially compared to conservatives.

Apparently this criticism is based on conservatives’ skepticism about global warming — despite the studies of distinguished research scientists Dr. Alicia Silverstone and Dr. Woody Harrelson. (In my case, it’s only because I’m still waiting for liberals’ global cooling theory from the ’70s to come true.)

The left’s idea of “science” is that we should all be riding bicycles and using the Clivus Multrum composting latrines instead of flush toilets. Anyone who dissents, they say — while adjusting their healing crystals for emphasis — is “afraid of science.”

A review of the record, however, shows that time and again liberals have been willing to corrupt public policy and allow people to die in order to enforce the Luddite views of groups such as the Union of Concerned Scientists (original name, “Union of Concerned Activist Lawyers Who Took a Science Course in High School”).

As I described in my book “Godless,” both the government and the entire mainstream media lied about AIDS in the ’80s by scaring Americans into believing that heterosexuals were as much at risk for acquiring AIDS as gays and intravenous drug users. The science had to be lied about so no one’s feelings got hurt.

In 1985, Life magazine’s cover proclaimed: “NOW, NO ONE IS SAFE FROM AIDS.” In 1987, U.S. News & World Report reported that AIDS was “finding fertile growth among heterosexuals.” Also in 1987, Dr. Oprah Winfrey said that “research studies” predicted that “one in five heterosexuals could be dead from AIDS at the end of the next three years.”

In 1988, ABC’s “20/20″ claimed the CDC had discovered a shocking upsurge of heterosexual infections on college campuses. It struck no one as odd that 28 of the 30 infections had occurred in men (with alphabetized spice racks and at least three cats, one named Blanche).

Pages: 1 2

  • Bookdoc

    I always find it amazing that liberals denounce Ann's articles without ever refuting any of her points. Another great column!

  • James Flavin

    I'm an American living in Iwaki, Japan-20 miles from the damaged reactors, Based on your advice about radiation, I'm staying put. I wonder if any trial lawyers out there would like to represent me in a suit against you, preferably in my birth state of Massachusetts.
    I can't think of a better state to get a fair hearing involving Ann Coulter. Before my computer crashes due to excess offers, I want to say that all the above is true-except that my decision to stay was in no way based on your advice. Just a cautionary warning about what could happen and how little real science would play in such a suit.

    • QuantumSam

      All my relatives in Japan are staying put because they figured that since they survived Hiroshima, the current situation would be easy.

    • tagalog

      Based upon even the panic-stricken news from such journalistic paragons as CBS, ABC, NBC, and Fox News, it appears that staying where you are in Japan will be just fine for your health.

      There's absolutely no advantage for you in suing Ann Coulter, since by your own written statement, you're not staying where you are because of what she has said in her article. So I bet your phone isn't ringing off the wall with calls from lawyers eager to sue for you. No realistic likelihood of a recovery there.

      • James Flavin

        Your exactly correct and that is why I made a point of saying that Ann's article did not affect my decision, The point that I was trying to make is that we are all vulnerable to people who don't take responsibility for their actions, and to juries who just want to make the pain to go away with "cash therapy. Ann, being a wee bit to the right, would make a near perfect target. If I were to claim that she had influenced me to stay, I would not have to prove any real damages, I could simply (and incorrectly) claim that on second thought I was suffering from anxiety and it was all her fault. Bottom line: It's my decision and my responsibility.

  • Jim

    Liberal science is a throw back to the religious methods of the middle ages. They rely on fear and attack those who do not buy their bag of nonsense. If they had a chance they would burn the dissenters at the stake. Now they just try to get them fired.

    Their motives and goals are so twisted that the normal mind can't believe any one could think the way the liberals do. Thus the public either ignores them or wonders what is the matter with them.

  • Liberty Clinger

    "You believe that reality is something objective, external, existing in its own right. You also believe that the nature of reality is self-evident… I tell you Winston that reality is not external. Reality exists in the human mind and nowhere else; not in the individual mind, which can make mistakes and in any case soon perishes; only in the mind of the Party, which is collective and immortal. Whatever the Party holds to be truth is truth… When we are omnipotent we shall have no more need of science." George Orwell – 1984

  • alexander

    Imbeciles like Krugman and our "save-the-world-celebrities" have an IQ below70, and that's why they do not like IQ studies.
    Is ALgor somewhere under the gigatons of snow hoping for a hot summer?

    • truthin


    • Liberty Clinger

      Unfortunately Krugman is very intelligent, but so were Lenin, Stalin and Trotsky.

  • truthin

    FIrst of all, it's freaking HILARIOUS that Coulter is now taking an artice in the NYTimes as gospel. Second, I'm sorry that liberals have blinded you with science. We should let you continue to teach your creationism. Ann, you have just consigned yourself to the dustbin of history.

    • Liberty Clinger

      You missed or ignored the whole point. Ann Coulter says that American Leftists (Marxists and their useful idiots) are blinding us with perverted science – blinded by the oxymoron of false science.

    • nightspore

      You're not replying to the article – as usual.

      • USMCSniper

        That is because he has his lips pressed to Obama's hemmoroids.

  • theleastthreat

    The Left's last scientific breakthrough came when they made the big move in utensils from rocks to pointy sticks.

  • derekcrane

    Ann is correct about the theory of hormesis. The use of vitamin and mineral supplements are a good example of hormesis in practice. The substances we consume in a multi vitamin and mineral pill are highly toxic. Selenium, Molybdenum, Chromium and other ingredients will kill at relatively low doses, however, these substances are necessary for life and, indeed, enhance well-being when consumed at micro-doses. The poison is in the dose.