You are obviously not a scientist as there is no such thing as a "science denier", there are only scientists. True scientists constantly question current science thought with the result being the advance of science. Without such questioning we would still believe the Earth is flat and at the center of the universe, that disease is caused by "bad blood", that a persons sex is determined by that person and not his DNA and that every time it rains, snows or the wind blows it is the result of humans burning oil.

By Lee McIntyre

While watching the House impeachment hearings, I realized my two decades of research into why people ignore, reject or deny science had a political parallel.

From anti-evolutionists to anti-v*****e advocates, known as “anti-v**xers,” c*****e c****e deniers to Flat Earthers, science deniers all follow a common pattern of faulty reasoning that allows them to reject what they don’t want to believe – and accept what they favor – based on a misunderstanding of how science deals with evidence.

As I’ve been watching the hearings, I’ve noticed that a number of characteristics of this type of reasoning are now being embraced by President Donald Trump and his congressional supporters.

There are five common tactics used by science deniers. In 1998, brothers Mark and Chris Hoofnagle (a lawyer and a physiologist) wrote an early blog post about science denialism. That was followed by further work by econometrician Pascal Diethelm and public health scholar Martin McKee and cognitive scientists John Cook and Stephan Lewandowsky. All identified the following factors as characteristic acts of science deniers:

Believing in conspiracy theories;
Relying on cherry-picked evidence;
Relying on f**e experts (and dismissal of actual experts);
Committing logical errors;
Setting impossible standards for what science should be able to deliver.

These elements are present when those who deny the Earth is round or who believe v*****es cause autism insist that there is a governmental cover-up of the real evidence on their topics. They can be seen when Ted Cruz tries to discredit c*****e c****e with talk about the anomalous world w*****r p*****n in 1998 due to El Niño. And they’re evident when intelligent design theorists complain that evolution by natural se******n still has not been proven.

Trump and his defenders in Congress echo this pattern. Even though Trump has firsthand knowledge of some of the facts under dispute – whereas his supporters may not – all seem to have bought in fully to the idea that the actual political situation is not the one pictured in the mainstream consensus of facts and evidence, but instead is based on an alternative reality.

Here are the five ways Trump and his allies use the same strategies as science deniers:

Conspiracy theories: During his questioning of Ambassador Bill Taylor and other witnesses at the impeachment hearings, Republican counsel Steve Castor repeatedly pursued a debunked conspiracy theory involving an alleged plot in which the Ukrainian government – and not the Russians – interfered with the 2016 p**********l e******n because they were out to get the president.

Cherry-picking: Gordon Sondland, U.S. ambassador to the European Union, testified before the House Intelligence Committee that President Trump told him, “I want nothing from Ukraine. I want no quid pro quo.” Trump and his supporters focused on this statement as evidence of his innocence, despite the fact that in other testimony by Sondland that day, he said, “Mr. Giuliani’s requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky…Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the president of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the president.”

Discrediting experts: President Trump has repeatedly – and falsely – claimed that State Department and CIA employees such as Bill Taylor, George Kent, Fiona Hill, Alexander Vindman and others who have testified in the impeachment hearings are “Never Trumpers,” a term for Republicans who do not support Trump – and who therefore have no credibility. His supporters have latched onto this tactic. GOP Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri said on Sept. 20, after the whistleblower complaint was made public: “It looks to me like another deep-state attack.”

Illogical reasoning: Trump supporters have claimed that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky never complained that he felt pressured by Trump to do the investigations into the Bidens that Trump sought. Trump himself has described the July 25 conversation he had with Zelensky in which he asked for the investigations as “perfect.” But news reports have shown that Zelensky did in fact feel pressured, and analysts have pointed out that Zelensky would risk losing crucial U.S. support were he to anger Trump by saying that he felt pressured.

Double standard for opponents: Trump claimed that written testimony from the whistleblower was unacceptable, despite the fact that he himself had only given written testimony in the Mueller investigation. Some of his supporters seem to agree and have tried to compel the whistleblower’s in-person testimony.

What might be behind the similarities between Trump defenders and science deniers? Perhaps, like science denial, all fact denial is basically the same. All ideology supports the reflex to believe what you want to believe. Scholars have studied the role of identity in shaping belief and concluded that sometimes even empirical beliefs can be tribal, reflecting what the other people on your team want you to believe. Adherence to a belief is not always based on evidence. The danger, of course, is that even as new facts come in, people won’t change their minds. This is the direct opposite of good empirical reasoning.

It is the hallmark of science that beliefs should be based on evidence, and that people should be willing to change their beliefs based on new evidence. This means that people should be able to specify in advance what evidence, if it existed, would be sufficient to get them to change their minds.

But are Trump and his congressional supporters doing that?

Like science deniers, no amount of evidence seems sufficient to change their partisan beliefs that the phone call with Zelensky was proper and that Trump “did nothing wrong.”

Even when the facts are overwhelming, congressional Republicans seem, like science deniers, willing to contort their beliefs and torture their logic, to stick to the party line because that is who they are.

As Senator Lindsey Graham recently put it, “I don’t care what anybody else says about the phone call … The phone call, I’ve made up my own mind, is fine.”

In science, such behavior means that one is eventually read out of the profession – you’re not fired, your tenure isn’t revoked, but you’re no longer taken seriously anymore.

In politics, it is not yet clear what the consequences might be.

My next likely visit east to the Knoxville, Tn. area to visit our daughter likely won't be 'til next September. Going through Mobile would add quite a few miles to our trip, but your invite sounds worth it. I will let you know with periodic updates.

September also, if I recall correctly, is historically a bad month for Gulf Coast hurricanes. September 25th is the date my daughter & I try to spend together memorializing the death of her 8-yr. old son Bryson, my grandson. In the past, I have always traveled I-20 or I-30 to visit with her. The possibility of any hurricane may well play into those travel plans.

So sorry to hear of your loss. I can't even begin to imagine your pain and your daughter's and all the other loved ones.
My iPad is BROKE. I'M trying to navigate on Jack's computer! The invitation will always be open. We won't be sticking around for any hurricane.........That's what insurance is for! We won't be among those that 'ride it out!' Jack went out with a neighbor to check out an old boat that had been given to him and took some beautiful pictures of the river! We are regretting having sold our ol' Ranger Bass boat! She was old but would be perfect for fishing close to home in the river. Another ol' fishing 'river' boat will probably be my Christmas present! LOL!

We lost Bryson nine years ago, but the pain & anguish of losing him lingers. In our getting together as often as we can, my daughter and I remember and celebrate the absolute joy he brought us, rather than dwelling on our loss.

It is always nice when one has great options in their travel plans. I will not forget your offer and ASAP, hope & plan to take advantage of your authentic Texas/Southern hospitality. And, btw, The Sgt. Major is excellent at fishing. Me, not so much.

Hey Satan, what you have posted is malarkey, just like Slow Joe's bus, Malarkey, is appropriately named for him and his phoney run for the presidency. Like Slow Joe , you spout palititudes which sound so good to l*****ts and those who are unenlightened but you twist and turn the facts to fit your imaginary l*****t ideology. Everything you posted is apropos to the demorat party, the party of corruption, perversion and totalitarianism. When you are incapable of seeing and hearing Biden actually talking of his quid pro quo agenda to get a prosecutor off drug crazed H****r B***n's criminality with his Burisma company and his Ukranian collusion in exchange for Joe withholding $1.5 billion in foreign aid to the Ukrainian government, something is seriously amiss in your biased thinking. Please keep your biased reasoning between you and all the other deranged biased l*****ts on this site. It is impossible for you to be objective. Where were you when ovommit gave $$$ billions of untraceable cash to his favorite boys, the islamic terrorists, so that his islamic brothers could keep terrorizing the Middle East? I guess you approve of ovommit's criminality too?

Regarding your "palititudes" (presumably 'platitudes') comment, I offer the following from, I believe, Proverbs: "Anxiety in a man's heart weighs it down, but an encouraging word makes it glad."

It must be hard for one such as yourself...so dazed by and full of h**e, bitterness and confusion... to understand its meaning.

The rest of the post, like so many of yours, is unworthy of response.