You've been reading lies. Flat Earthers are pretty much non-existent. Climate Change Realists are mostly right wing because the big government Left benefits from the scam. Anti vaxxers are in both groups, but more Left than Right.

Climate Change Realists is the funniest phrase I've heard in a while.

You should look up all the main sites spreading anti vaccination propaganda , they end to be pretty definitively on the right. Natural news for instance has been one of the most prominent sites.

"Realists" is a lot more accurate than "Deniers" since almost nobody denies that climate can change. The term "denier" was designed to imply a link to Holocaust Deniers, name calling because they couldn't win a science-based argument. But if you want to actually discuss the science rather than just appeal to authority then I'm here to help you.

Sites are not representative of the population as a whole. There are more unvaccinated people in states that voted for Obama than in states that didn't. The Joe Sixpacks of the world don't have websites, but they still refuse to vaccinate their kids.

And since you referred to the anti-science party, I guess you referred to the one that believes that genetics does not determine gender.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Climate Change Realists is the funniest phrase I've heard in a while.

You should look up all the main sites spreading anti vaccination propaganda , they end to be pretty definitively on the right. Natural news for instance has been one of the most prominent sites.

"Realists" is a lot more accurate than "Deniers" since almost nobody denies that climate can change. The term "denier" was designed to imply a link to Holocaust Deniers, name calling because they couldn't win a science-based argument. But if you want to actually discuss the science rather than just appeal to authority then I'm here to help you.

Sites are not representative of the population as a whole. There are more unvaccinated people in states that voted for Obama than in states that didn't. The Joe Sixpacks of the world don't have websites, but they still refuse to vaccinate their kids.

And since you referred to the anti-science party, I guess you referred to the one that believes that genetics does not determine gender.

People do deny man made climate change though. They deny it exists.  

No but political affliation of the main pushers of the anti-vaxxer narrative IS important, and they are nearly all conservative sites. 

I'm referring the party who is openly skeptical of evolution and has a large segment who believe in Noah's Ark as a factual tale

---

"Realists" is a lot more accurate than "Deniers" since almost nobody denies that climate can change. The term "denier" was designed to imply a link to Holocaust Deniers, name calling because they couldn't win a science-based argument. But if you want to actually discuss the science rather than just appeal to authority then I'm here to help you.

Sites are not representative of the population as a whole. There are more unvaccinated people in states that voted for Obama than in states that didn't. The Joe Sixpacks of the world don't have websites, but they still refuse to vaccinate their kids.

And since you referred to the anti-science party, I guess you referred to the one that believes that genetics does not determine gender.

People do deny man made climate change though. They deny it exists.  

No but political affliation of the main pushers of the anti-vaxxer narrative IS important, and they are nearly all conservative sites. 

I'm referring the party who is openly skeptical of evolution and has a large segment who believe in Noah's Ark as a factual tale

Many people, including scientists, disagree that humans have much influence on climate, and there has been no proof that they have.

Maybe you can come up with some obscure "conservative" sites that promote anti-vaxxing, and both people who visit them are faithfully letting their kids die. I doubt they are actually conservative except in your narrow viewpoint that anyone who disagrees with your worldview is an evil conservative. But there's no way all of those Obama voters who didn't vaccinate their kids were influenced by "conservative sites."

First off, evolution is still less definitive than genetics, so those who deny that gender is determined by one's chromosomes is much deeper into science denial. Noah's Ark is religion, not politics, and most "intelligent design" talk is also religious-based (some isn't). I knew a physics professor who was also very religious, but not a conservative, who believed the world is only a few thousand years old. A physics professor! Go figure! I guess he thought that the universe was created with the light from distant stars already on its way.

The fact that certain religious people currently are mostly Republicans is because they see (from their viewpoint if not yours) that the Dems are proposing laws targeting their religion. It's not because conservatism is part of the religion.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

People do deny man made climate change though. They deny it exists.  

No but political affliation of the main pushers of the anti-vaxxer narrative IS important, and they are nearly all conservative sites. 

I'm referring the party who is openly skeptical of evolution and has a large segment who believe in Noah's Ark as a factual tale

Many people, including scientists, disagree that humans have much influence on climate, and there has been no proof that they have.

Maybe you can come up with some obscure "conservative" sites that promote anti-vaxxing, and both people who visit them are faithfully letting their kids die. I doubt they are actually conservative except in your narrow viewpoint that anyone who disagrees with your worldview is an evil conservative. But there's no way all of those Obama voters who didn't vaccinate their kids were influenced by "conservative sites."

First off, evolution is still less definitive than genetics, so those who deny that gender is determined by one's chromosomes is much deeper into science denial. Noah's Ark is religion, not politics, and most "intelligent design" talk is also religious-based (some isn't). I knew a physics professor who was also very religious, but not a conservative, who believed the world is only a few thousand years old. A physics professor! Go figure! I guess he thought that the universe was created with the light from distant stars already on its way.

The fact that certain religious people currently are mostly Republicans is because they see (from their viewpoint if not yours) that the Dems are proposing laws targeting their religion. It's not because conservatism is part of the religion.

Many more believe that it does, which is the crux of the matter. There is plenty of proof that it does but of course tribalism means it'll be completely disregarded as a plot to seize power. 

Also, you might want to look up the history of conservatism and religion, religious people aren't just conservative because they think Dems are trying to target their religion lmao.

---