[kelipso]

Isn't the likelihood insanely low like 10%? Maybe since it's a government researcher the likelihood is higher.

This thought calls into question why conservatives should even support academia in general, especially liberal arts academia, which shuns conservative thought like the plague while having massive influence upon the culture. At least STEM has measurable value.

[goatlover]

I'm not a conservative, but the most recent Mindscape podcast had a psychologist on talking about polarization, and she presented the most polarized position, while also mentioning the bad things about being polarized. It was an educated version of what you would expect to find on any popular reddit sub when politics comes up.

[kelipso]

It's amazing to me how even more STEM-ish fields like biology or medicine has biases like this and even censors research that align against liberal values.

[taylodl]

> liberal arts academia

Which is where one studies physics, chemistry, mathematics, computer science, amongst many other such studies.

Here's how STEM tends to break down at universities:

S - College of Liberal Arts

T - College of Engineering

E - College of Engineering

M - College of Medicine

Not every university is the same of course, but that's pretty much how STEM gets divided amongst the colleges. Now, if you want to make the claim that conservatives don't support science, I'm not going to disagree with you. It's been wryly noted that reality has a liberal bias.

[kelipso]

Great, what was really needed in this discussion was some rules lawyering nerd making some asinine point and a dig at conservatives. Good job I guess. I'm predicting a lot of people's reality will turn upside down in the near future when they find out they are not living in the early 2000s anymore and reality has a conservative bias lol.