Science Vs - Season 1
About This Show
ABOUT THE PODCAST
In Science Vs, Science journalist Wendy Zukerman dissects the latest fad framing itself as scientific fact.
Wendy wades through the mass of information so you don't have to.
Do women and men have different brains? Is porn changing the way we have sex? Does race exist? Is sugar really that bad for you?
Everyone has an opinion but then, there's SCIENCE.
NB: This feed only has season 1 of Science Vs.
Most Recent Episode
Science Vs The Next Chapter
Oct 22 15
Science Vs is moving to a new home in New York City. New episodes be available on a different iTunes feed! If you get lost head to Wendy's twitter @wendyzuk or the Science Vs' Facebook page: facebook.com/sciencevspodcast. We hope to see you soon. Also, you can find more ABC science-y goodness with Dr Karl on Triple J here: https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/dr-karl-on-triplej/id73331325?mt=2
Rated 5 out of
entertaining and smart
the host is quite entertaining with a bit off beat sense of humor and this show presents new science and interesting perspectives on topics. highly recommend. like american life, but with an aussie accent.
Date published: 2016-11-01
Rated 1 out of
Disappointed Sr Citizen
Claiming To Be Factual With Biased Input
I have been listening to this Podcast for about 4 months and, until today, I have enjoyed the content and professional due diligence, discovery work and presentation with an emphasis on balanced, non-political positions on a wide range of topics.
Today, I listened to the March 10, "Immigration" podcast and found it to be heavily non-factual, undocumented and biased towards liberal / socialist views that promote the opening of our doors to increased illegal immigration.
As far as I am concerned, the producer has now put Science VS in the category of being politically motivated. She has done this by conveniently avoiding missing facts, the crux of the problem (illegal immigrants not paying their way) and painting a positive picture on a highly speculative assumption that today's immigrant children are going to pay back the "taking" of their parents by out performing existing or not so recently immigrated Americans.
In short, the producer:
1. Used mainly interview input from American's with foreign origins with the exception of one barbershop Alabamian who was being respectful in giving her the answers she sought. "Well, I get your point.....!"
2. Set out of list of (5) Key Topics, none of which included the nucleus of the issue we face, "illegal immigrates who take everything free and do not pay taxes"
3. Made the point early on in the podcast that there is a lack of authenticated documentation as regards "illegal" immigrants and the amount of taxes they are NOT paying. How conveniently setting the stage for a prejudiced report, that has, oddly one point that made sense; the extra cost of immigrants not paying their way.
4. If I understood correctly, brought up the "fact" that 40% of the documented immigrants residing in the USA take home an EXTRA US$5,000 in (food subsidy, housing subsidy, medical care, education, food stamps, etc), that I nor other, born in America, citizens receive, without explaining why this happens. This fact should be a hot topic all in itself. Why are my tax dollars paying and additional $5,000 for documented immigrants over that being paid for the poor in America born here and not having a good economic experience?
5. States that ONLY 8.2% of Americans are challenged for a job by illegal immigrants. ONLY translates roughly into 26.8 Million (based on 326.7 Million pop) What is so insignificant about nearly 27 Million hard to employ Americans competing with illegal immigrants?
6. If I understood correctly, she used only or mainly American College research findings which we already understand are highly liberal and leftist leaning. These young kids are apparently buying in on the elite and the socialist spins supporting enabling the able to be disabled; where neither of these two parties care about how my hard-earned tax dollars are spent since the elite have it already, the student doesn't earn yet and the college academic is receiving a nice fat subsidy or grant to publish biased findings.
7. A lack of FBI recording of arrest facts, differentiating immigrant (legal or non-legal) and violent and non-violent property crimes. Not blaming the producer but are our responsible agencies not keeping better records or are they choosing not to disclose? If either is so, let's correct for the sake of factual based decision-making. A convenient 1986 prison records examination was mentioned to show it's not so bad.
8. A hard to believe interview with ONE person who is the authority on UK Immigration issues and has declared, there is not issue there, just bad perception by 50% of the population. Used similar tactic and Alabama to make the same claim for the USA.
I both welcome and respect any immigrant who enters America LEGALLY, PAYS their duly owed taxes and ABIDES by our laws. My father immigrated legally from Canada in 1916, worked hard and paid his taxes without question.
Well there's the view of a 73 year old American, born in the USA, who followed the guidance of my immigrant father. I estimate having paid roughly US$755,000 in taxes, social security and medicare over the past 50 years. Regrettably, my wife and I now live solely on social security and struggle to make ends meet. I am open to be corrected if I am not factual or if I have mis-understood.
Date published: 2017-04-04