Two types of science

By "a lot," are you talking absolute numbers or percentage? Either way, do you have any evidence so support your claim? You may need to define the terms "conservative" and "support science" as part of your proffer of proof.

Sorry, but given that conservatives as a group support creationism, deny climate change, and misrepresent the facts about contraceptives, abortion and AIDS for political purposes, your assurance that "a lot" of conservatives support science fails to convince me.

I did not say all conservatives, I said conservatives as a group.If what you say is correct, it won't be hard to name "a lot" of conservatives who don't support any of those things. Can you?

Well, there's 1,000 members there. I wouldn't call 1,000 of anything a lot in a country of over 300,000,000. And that's even assuming all 1,000 of them are from the US, an assumption I think is highly questionable.If you wanted to revise your statement to some conservatives support science, I'd agree. You need a hell of a lot more than you've shown so far to be able to claim that a lot do.Moreover, it's rather disappointing for you to claim that you couldn't care less about the rest. I'm an old school Goldwater Republican, what today's conservatives call RINO, or in some cases socialist, and I'm embarrassed by what modern conservatism has become. If I still called myself conservative, I'd be positively mortified by the state of the party. It's people who continue to follow along with neocons and who don't care about what they've done to the party that have all but destroyed it. If intelligent conservatives stood up to the godstapo instead of letting them control the direction of the party, they never would have allowed Sara Palin or Paul Ryan anywhere near the ticket and we might not have had 8 years of Obama.If you are in fact correct that a lot of conservatives support science, you, my friend, and people like you, are what is wrong with conservatism.