Steve Breen for April 25, 2018

The sign should read American public.

Or Ethics…Or Responsibility…

Don’t worry. That’s ‘beautiful clean coal’. It will still kill but it has the president’s approval.

trump’s nominee to head NASA would join Pruitt throwing the torch. We are f*&ked.

Amazing. Where anyone with a shred of decency or even just self-awareness would be frantically trying to escape firing or even jail, Pruitt has doubled down on his horrific assault on the institution he “leads” and every purpose it was founded to do.

Let nothing stand in the way of profits..

Pruitt is now requiring that all data used for environmental policies be in the public sphere. Sounds OK until you realize that much of the raw data involves personal or medical information and therefore is not publicly available. You know, that privacy thing that everyone is worried about? In addition, raw data is often not useful until it has been collated, quantified and analyzed statistically. Pruitt is a scientific illiterate and fits right into the Trump administration.

This is what happens when you put someone from the torch industry in charge. Talk about a witch hunt…

This is almost the opposite of Lisa Benson’s strip, but this one is true.

Republicans hate science when it gets in the way of profits.

SHOPPERSMITHS, liberals pay attention to actual science including the more complex parts beyond what is taught in elementary school. Gender is far more complex than XX or XY. Look at Jamie Leigh Curtis and female athletes banned from the Olympics because they “failed” gender testing, just a couple of examples.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-new-science-of-sex-and-gender/

Science defines truths that are inconvenient to the desire to deregulate all industry and relax/remove limitations on pollution to the air, water, or earth.

Pollution = profits, and we have to maximize profits!

@Shoppersmiths — HAHAHA! I am a scientist, and indeed a psychological researcher. I read six journals regularly and associate with other professionals in my field. I am happy to tell you about the current science into gender and sexuality.

First of all, well done! You separated “gender,” which is defined as the psychological state, from “sexuality,” which is the physical.

Second of all, it is now well established that your sexual preferences are on a continuum rather than being binary. It’s more like handedness: most people are mostly right-handed, but some people are mostly left-handed, some use both equally, and a few are at the extremes of only right- or left-handedness. And nearly everyone uses their non-dominant hand occasionally.

So you can think of yourself as 95% straight male, for instance, or you can be 50-50, or whatever else along that continuum.

Third of all, it is also well proven that one can indeed have a conflict between one’s physical state and one’s mental state — between gender and sexuality; hence being “trans” is a reflection of a reality of brain structure. While there are no perceptible cognitive differences between men and women, there are differences in the neuroarchitecture, strongly influenced by prenatal testosterone, and people have been found with a brain structure not reflecting the rest of their bodies, so to speak. And that doesn’t even get into issues like “intersex” people, who are literally between sexes (no, not gender, sexes) and have the body parts to prove it. Or, for that matter, the people who are androgen-resistant, which means they don’t respond to testosterone like most would. Since the default mammalian body form is female, that means you get someone with XY chromosomes but otherwise an entirely female body, because the prenatal transition I described above does not occur.

None of this has anything to do with politics. Just science. Too bad some politicians aren’t willing to accept the science.

Willful ignorance in action.