Rush Limbaugh is not a scientist. But his under educated listeners and his diminishing congregation of men and women who are not critical thinkers hang on to his every word about science as if he were. In spite of the research done by legitimate scientists, Rush relentlessly lies to his public about global warming. He would have them believe that global warming is a hoax. But Rush is just a business man playing to the prejudices and fears of his audience, most of whom apparently are not critical thinkers or very intelligent.
The attack on science by conservative congressmen is not so easily explained unless they do it for the same reasons as Limbaugh. The affronts to legitimate science by congressional members from the conservative right is nothing short of irresponsible, dishonest, stupid, or insane--take your pick.
Paul Broun, (Republican, Georgia) told an audience that what he was taught about evolution, embryology, and the Big Bang theory are "lies from the pit of hell" designed to keep him and others from knowing that they need a savior. Broun, a member of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology is recorded saying he believes the planet Earth is about 9,000 years old and that it was made in six days. His reasoning or lack thereof is a prime example of Republican Science.
For more Republican Science on the State Level. Take a look at Ed Orcutt (State House Republican, Washington). Mr Orcutt believes that riding a bicycle causes more pollution than driving an automobile. He refutes the claim that riding a bicycle is environmentally friendly because, as he put it a bicycle rider has an "increased heart rate and respiration. That means that the act of riding a a bike results in greater emissions of carbon dioxide from the rider. Since CO2 is deemed to be a greenhouse gas and a pollutant, bicyclist are actually polluting when they ride." Apparently Mr Orcutt does not know the difference between the very toxic gas, CO and CO2. Nor does he understand the use of Carbon Dioxide by plants as part of the process that produces oxygen that allow humans to breath.
These are not the only examples, of course, just two of the more troubling from Republicans on the state and national level who should be educated leaders. But the Republican Party's attack on sanity and science is so relentless that most scientists are turning away from the Republican Party. The Pew Research center in a 2009 research study found that less than 10% of scientists identified themselves as conservative while 52% identified themselves as liberal. But less than 7% of scientists said they were Republicans.
Conservative attacks on sanity and the sciences are not restricted to the natural sciences. It also extends to the Social Sciences. Representative James Lankford (Republican, Oklahoma) blame welfare mothers for gun violence. Pat Robertson blamed the Boston Marathon Bombings on the acceptance of liberals and the gay community.
The House of Representatives recently voted on an amendment sponsored by Jeff Flake (Senate Republican, Arizona) to cut all National Science foundations funding for political science. There is no budgetary benefits to these cut as the share for political science research is minuscule. Could the reasoning be part of the conservative effort to dumb down the American public? Would that be a major goal when you plan to abuse and take advantage of your "subjects"?
Thankfully many Americans are critical thinkers. And most Americans are not as dumb nor as insane as conservatives would have us be.