Alex Berezow: 5 myths held by modern Progressives

Third-party photos, graphics, and video clips in this video may have been cropped or reframed. Music in this video may have been recut from its original arrangement and timing.

In the event this video uses Creative Commons assets: If not noted in the description, titles for Creative Commons assets used in this video can be found at the link provided after each asset.

The use of third-party photos, graphics, video clips, and/or music in this video does not constitute an endorsement from the artists and producers licensing those materials.

AEI operates independently of any political party and does not take institutional positions on any issues. AEI scholars, fellows, and their guests frequently take positions on policy and other issues. When they do, they speak for themselves and not for AEI or its trustees or other scholars or employees.

#news #politics #government #education

[Aetheras]

4 is an absolute, I much agree. Science being only relative is ridiculous. It's relative from the perspective of science for the sake of a singular cause and movement, however there are far too many cross-overs in science to make that claim. Let alone Einstein was misquoted, having said relatives, not relative, meaning literal correlation between two points and concepts, not based on relative perspective of the observer.

5 is also true, science is often NOT on their side (global warming).

[Aetheras]

I have to somewhat disagree. 1 and 2 are exceedingly general, and in MANY, if not most cases, turns out to be true. Now, if I said that there is more nutrients in natural foods as opposed to gmo foods, I would be wrong more often than not. Nutrient count is based solely around growing/feeding method, sunlight, water, and pH balance. However, to say GMO's code for proteins and sugars our digestive system is not designed to handle is true; they're technically poisons.

[Aetheras]

3 is taken to most unreasonable levels, and often this point is wrong. However, it is correct on a moral and ethical standpoint. Simply being able to do something does not make it a good thing to do. Given how little we understand genetics and how the process of mutation and adaptation actually work in the real world (random, environmental response, or some other mechanism like a personal/group will and resulting physiological response, if not combinations), caution is more than prudent.

[Aetheras]

Same goes for 2, though more often than not unnatural things are bad. Oil based plastics are very hard to break down by any digestive system nature has designed. Many common plastics cannot even be recycled, and the cost to recycle those that can are often greater than the cost to produce. This goes the same for biofuels, which when burned, often produce more and worse toxins than oil, of which refinement is usually just a purification process. Biofuels are unnaturally produced, oil is not.

[eisvogel]

Still working for Monsanto, Mr. BEREZOW?