Stupidest Science Statement Ever!

Ok, tell me what is wrong with this statement?

Research by John Hibbing, a University of Nebraska political scientist, showed that identical twins share more political beliefs than fraternal twins. They also, of course, share more genes.

Any takers?

You can't say because twins share more genes they share political beliefs. No, it don't work like that in statistics! Cause ya know what, if a set of twins sit every afternoon when they are 3 and listen to Rush Limbaugh, odds are they are going to agree with Rush when they are older. Does that have to do with genes or the fact that Rush was on the radio?

Ok, now compare this with the idea that kids eat unhealthy because they see commercials for unhealthy foods during kids' shows. Assuming that is true, doesn't that mean that kids like, osmosis what is going on in their environment?

Overall, the article this quote came from is stupid. Genes do not influence politics. What does is environment and learning. Those that learn to blame others and demand others care for them are liberal; those that understand self-responsibility are conservative. I would make that guarantee over anything, ANYTHING that has to do with genetics. Yep.

By the way, the idea that conservatives abhor social change and like the status quo, while technically definitionally correct is not accurate anymore. Real conservatives would like to shake up the social order and limit government (actually, the "classical liberal" position) while today's liberals want to maintain the status quo. Liberals actually don't want real equality between blacks and whites anymore. (I must add, if they ever did. A greater percentage of Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act than did Democrats.) Today's liberals bow down to race baiters like Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Neither of those two men, both liberal, would want true equality. They would lose their jobs. It is actually conservatives who want to continue to shake-up the social order of liberals in academia who want to maintain the status quo with discrimination of all types allowed.

In another history lesson, classical conservatives used to want to keep monarchies. Classical liberals wanted to empower citizens. Thus, Jefferson, Adams, and Madison would have been classical liberals, but I would hesitate to call any of them liberals today. Don't know about calling them conservative either. Probably would be libertarians. Then again, they might also have updated their beliefs after knowing how their government was corrupted over the years and also learning about new technology that would change the form or even need of government.