Bill Maher is a science denialist
Bill Maher, a rather liberal talk show host, has recently been joining the anti-vaccination crowd, adding his voice to the Hollywood centered vaccination denialists. He is a typical science denialist, ignoring the vast wealth of science, research and publications, to make statements, in this case about promoting pseudoscience in his dismissal of the value of vaccines. Moreover, Mr. Maher spends time denying he is a denialist, which usually is an indicator that one is a denialist.
Interestingly, Maher is usually in sync with my feelings about global warming and evolution denialists, who use pseudoscience and outright denial to "prove" that there is no global warming or evolution. Usually, skeptics or anti-denialists (one day we need to get this terminology right) are consistent, we dismiss pseudoscience outright. I have no clue why he has chosen this particular pseudoscience and quackery to support, but maybe he just thinks Jenny McCarthy knows more than real scientists.
Orac does an excellent job in showing that Maher is without any knowledge of the subject. I've linked below to one of Maher's conversations with Senator Bill Frist, a successful physician and politician, but no friend of progressive thinking in science and medicine. But in this case, he spares no quarter in beating down Maher's anti-vaccination points of view.
Maher is picking and choosing his science. He's rabidly against Intelligent Design, the pseudoscientific theory that denies the science behind evolution. He has sarcastically dismissed the global warming denialists. I had always presumed he did this because he had actually read and understood the science. However, his anti-science comments about vaccination are so weak and unsupported, I am actually convinced he just chooses his points of view for dramatic effect and to be "controversial." I used to enjoy Maher. Now I think he's pathetic. Does he understand how many children die each year in the United States because of the anti-vaccination movement?
By Michael W Simpson
Interestingly, Maher is usually in sync with my feelings about global warming and evolution denialists, who use pseudoscience and outright denial to "prove" that there is no global warming or evolution. Usually, skeptics or anti-denialists (one day we need to get this terminology right) are consistent, we dismiss pseudoscience outright. I have no clue why he has chosen this particular pseudoscience and quackery to support, but maybe he just thinks Jenny McCarthy knows more than real scientists.
Orac does an excellent job in showing that Maher is without any knowledge of the subject. I've linked below to one of Maher's conversations with Senator Bill Frist, a successful physician and politician, but no friend of progressive thinking in science and medicine. But in this case, he spares no quarter in beating down Maher's anti-vaccination points of view.
Maher is picking and choosing his science. He's rabidly against Intelligent Design, the pseudoscientific theory that denies the science behind evolution. He has sarcastically dismissed the global warming denialists. I had always presumed he did this because he had actually read and understood the science. However, his anti-science comments about vaccination are so weak and unsupported, I am actually convinced he just chooses his points of view for dramatic effect and to be "controversial." I used to enjoy Maher. Now I think he's pathetic. Does he understand how many children die each year in the United States because of the anti-vaccination movement?
By Michael W Simpson