Skip to main content

View Diary: Minnesota Republican explains where AIDS comes from (336 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The problem is.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GirlSwimmingInASeaOfRed

    you're asking them to think. As you probably know, thought experiments like yours - and yours is a good one - have been used by scientists to generate great insight into scientific problems. Critical thinking is difficult for people who refuse to see the world in any way but what their tunnel vision allows. Gay = bad therefore, gay sex must cause some terrible (pseudo) science bad thing to happen - which is a way to appeal to people who will reject the god hypothesis (AIDS is god's punishment). The amount of stupid uttered by our embarrassingly ignorant politicians is astounding. Of more concern is the media's unwillingness to fact check and call these loons out when they say stupid things. People who come up with their personal "scientific" theories when real science doesn't support their worldview should not be in positions of power.

    As the sperm approaches the zona pellucida of the egg, which is necessary for initiating the acrosome reaction, the membrane surrounding the acrosome fuses with the plasma membrane of the oocyte, exposing the contents of the acrosome. [emphasis mine] -source
    This would strongly suggest, no egg, no enzyme reaction. However, I'm stating this as my hypothesis, while Frey stated his idea as if it were fact. Besides, medical scientists say AIDS is caused by a virus.

    It would be better not to know so many things than to know so many things that are not so. - Felix Okaye

    by eclecticguy on Sun Jul 13, 2014 at 11:27:18 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  But, the GOP don't trust, "SCIENTISTS", because (0+ / 0-)

      "they have a liberal bias", or, as we know, the truth has a liberal bias, and they HATE that.

      •  Agreed. Science is concerned with facts, (0+ / 0-)

        and is self-correcting. The GOP reject any facts that contradict their world-view, often stating they are not experts in whatever they are talking about, but then say their non-expert viewpoint should trump the people who do know what they're talking about. When the evidence is so overwhelming that they can't support their viewpoint, they invent another distraction...and the beat goes on. Sigh.

        It would be better not to know so many things than to know so many things that are not so. - Felix Okaye

        by eclecticguy on Sun Jul 20, 2014 at 11:29:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site