Scientific American backs Biden in its 1st presidential endorsement

Yep. One more leftist rag endorses Joe Biden for president.

“The pandemic would strain any nation and system,” the editors wrote, “but Trump’s rejection of evidence and public health measures have been catastrophic in the U.S. He was warned many times in January and February about the onrushing disease, yet he did not develop a national strategy to provide protective equipment, coronavirus testing or clear health guidelines.

I guess that soon enough Trump will just add this to his list of ''fake news''.

Some I suppose would prefer to have this placed in the Mud Pit or one of the political forums but I think it belongs here, right here in the Science Forum.

www.scientificamerican.com...

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Yep. One more leftist rag endorses Joe Biden for president.

“The pandemic would strain any nation and system,” the editors wrote, “but Trump’s rejection of evidence and public health measures have been catastrophic in the U.S. He was warned many times in January and February about the onrushing disease, yet he did not develop a national strategy to provide protective equipment, coronavirus testing or clear health guidelines.

I guess that soon enough Trump will just add this to his list of ''fake news''.

Some I suppose would prefer to have this placed in the Mud Pit or one of the political forums but I think it belongs here, right here in the Science Forum.

www.scientificamerican.com...

Ironic that Scientific American is endorsing a candidate with obvious brain decline, quite a scientific approach.

Gee, now I cannot read Scientific American anymore since they definitely are not being scientific in endorsing a political party. If those guys cannot see that politicians lies are not real, why should I believe anything they say. They should keep their nose out of politics, they are cutting their own throats.

Scientific American editors seem to be polarized more these days than they were before, you used to be able to trust their articles integrety years ago, but lately they seem to be promoting socially accepted versions of research, not real interpretations of research. They try to glorify things instead of just telling you the boring results of research...I HATE THAT, Science is supposed to be a little boring.

originally posted by: panoz77

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Yep. One more leftist rag endorses Joe Biden for president.

“The pandemic would strain any nation and system,” the editors wrote, “but Trump’s rejection of evidence and public health measures have been catastrophic in the U.S. He was warned many times in January and February about the onrushing disease, yet he did not develop a national strategy to provide protective equipment, coronavirus testing or clear health guidelines.

I guess that soon enough Trump will just add this to his list of ''fake news''.

Some I suppose would prefer to have this placed in the Mud Pit or one of the political forums but I think it belongs here, right here in the Science Forum.

www.scientificamerican.com...

Ironic that Scientific American is endorsing a candidate with obvious brain decline, quite a scientific approach.

There's something about Joe Biden that Scientific American must really like!

we like to think of science types as motivated by pure logic, like Mister Spock, and beyond petty things.

in fact (especially in the Education community) they are as petty and political as the rest of us.

too much college intrigue and not enough pure science.

a reply to: panoz77

Yep, just one more case of fake news I guess is how you see it.

a reply to: rickymouse

So, we just discount their endorsement? Chalk it up to being unscientific? CANCEL them? I thought that it was the hated lefties that were in favor of Cancel Culture.

a reply to: ElGoobero

I guess that we, like Trump should accept the endorsement of famous rappers yet reject the endorsement of an age old scientific journal.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: rickymouse

So, we just discount their endorsement? Chalk it up to being unscientific? CANCEL them? I thought that it was the hated lefties that were in favor of Cancel Culture.

So what is the scientific basis for choosing Biden over Trump? Or is this purely a political statement in a Scientific magazine?
If it were based on "facts", science likes to use facts and statistics, then the obvious endorsement would be for Trump. Unlike Biden who chooses "truth over facts".

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

People forcing cancel culture on a whim is bad. People making a decision for themselves is not. If we were more principled in our decisions as consumers, it would really help to balance our brand of capitalism. Bad capitalism is user error.

Their endorsement of Biden looks to be in spite of Trump by their own statement, so just how serious should we take them?

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: panoz77

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Yep. One more leftist rag endorses Joe Biden for president.

“The pandemic would strain any nation and system,” the editors wrote, “but Trump’s rejection of evidence and public health measures have been catastrophic in the U.S. He was warned many times in January and February about the onrushing disease, yet he did not develop a national strategy to provide protective equipment, coronavirus testing or clear health guidelines.

I guess that soon enough Trump will just add this to his list of ''fake news''.

Some I suppose would prefer to have this placed in the Mud Pit or one of the political forums but I think it belongs here, right here in the Science Forum.

www.scientificamerican.com...

Ironic that Scientific American is endorsing a candidate with obvious brain decline, quite a scientific approach.

There's something about Joe Biden that Scientific American must really like!

They are hoping to get first dibs for Biden brain and those of his supporters to study dementia and rampant stupidity. The joke will be on them when they open them up.

Im sure it has nothing todo with major govt funding for global warming studies and other studies such as discovering if rocks are racist or homophobic.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

I wonder how much money Scientific America received from the Soros / Obama / Clinton Cabal?

Of course they do. Him being able to read off a teleprompter with 75% accuracy is a testament to modern medicine.

Duh!

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: panoz77

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Yep. One more leftist rag endorses Joe Biden for president.

“The pandemic would strain any nation and system,” the editors wrote, “but Trump’s rejection of evidence and public health measures have been catastrophic in the U.S. He was warned many times in January and February about the onrushing disease, yet he did not develop a national strategy to provide protective equipment, coronavirus testing or clear health guidelines.

I guess that soon enough Trump will just add this to his list of ''fake news''.

Some I suppose would prefer to have this placed in the Mud Pit or one of the political forums but I think it belongs here, right here in the Science Forum.

www.scientificamerican.com...

Ironic that Scientific American is endorsing a candidate with obvious brain decline, quite a scientific approach.

There's something about Joe Biden that Scientific American must really like!

Maybe because Biden takes science seriously and knows that without scientists we would still live in trees - like the people in Austria.

"Without science and research there would be no knowledge and thus no progress and no innovations. “
"Serious effort to get to the bottom of things elevates man; and real understanding of the connections is his only chance of survival."
"We as humanity face many unsolved problems - climate change, access to clean water, security and trust in cyberspace and the treatment of incurable diseases are just a few examples that must be solved through research".
"No research - no smartphone; no science - no aspirin."

www.sciencemediacenter.de... 017/

originally posted by: oloufo

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: panoz77

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Yep. One more leftist rag endorses Joe Biden for president.

“The pandemic would strain any nation and system,” the editors wrote, “but Trump’s rejection of evidence and public health measures have been catastrophic in the U.S. He was warned many times in January and February about the onrushing disease, yet he did not develop a national strategy to provide protective equipment, coronavirus testing or clear health guidelines.

I guess that soon enough Trump will just add this to his list of ''fake news''.

Some I suppose would prefer to have this placed in the Mud Pit or one of the political forums but I think it belongs here, right here in the Science Forum.

www.scientificamerican.com...

Ironic that Scientific American is endorsing a candidate with obvious brain decline, quite a scientific approach.

There's something about Joe Biden that Scientific American must really like!

Maybe because Biden takes science seriously and knows that without scientists we would still live in trees - like the people in Austria.

"Without science and research there would be no knowledge and thus no progress and no innovations. “
"Serious effort to get to the bottom of things elevates man; and real understanding of the connections is his only chance of survival."
"We as humanity face many unsolved problems - climate change, access to clean water, security and trust in cyberspace and the treatment of incurable diseases are just a few examples that must be solved through research".
"No research - no smartphone; no science - no aspirin."

www.sciencemediacenter.de... 017/

Yeah, science like when you order a country to terminate an investigation into your son's corruption and threaten to withhold a couple billion dollars, you get what you ordered. Cause and effect, you know, science.

Sceintific America is backing a group that Denies that a fetus is alive, but single celled organisms on Mars would be considered life on other planets.

A party that says that having female or male genitalia dont constitute your gender, and that males have a menstruation cycle too.

That rings the bell on Glaciers melting as proof of global warming but are mysteriously dead silent when images from space the next year show record growth of those same glaciers

A party that claims if you identify as a person of color thats ok , but wearing certain costumes, or practicing certain things are "cultural appropriation"

Etc etc etc ad neauseum

COLOR ME SHOCKED!!!!!

originally posted by: ElGoobero
we like to think of science types as motivated by pure logic, like Mister Spock, and beyond petty things.

in fact (especially in the Education community) they are as petty and political as the rest of us.

too much college intrigue and not enough pure science.

Far too much money in backing the "right people" so that are sure to get the money you want for your own projects i reckon

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Wow I am happy for Biden, getting a meaningless endorsement from them.
I am sure Biden had to ask 20 times who it was that was endorsing him with that particular one.

But then you have a real powerful endorsement of Trump by a group that means something....

“I have 36 years in this job, 21 as president of this fine organization," New York Police Benevolent Association President Patrick Lynch says.
"I cannot remember when we've ever endorsed for the office of president of the United States. Until now. That's how important this is."

But then again everyone on the Left thinks the country can get by without any law enforcement.
That speaks volumes for the effort they put into being stupid, they really go above and beyond stupid.

www.foxnews.com...

Just in, Better Homes and Garden endorses Joe Biden. They are in pure awe at his ability to campaign from his home and garden.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Federal express calls itself federal, doesn't mean it is.