Talk:Ben Carson

	This United States politics related article has been awarded SILVER status for quality. We like it, and you should too! See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

This article contains information about one or more living persons. Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats. Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed. If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Correction needed

Carson wasn't the first to separate twins joined at the head. The first successful craniopagus separation with good results was in the 1950s - the Andrews twins separated in Chicago. In that case the brains were separate, with the join being in the bone of the skull, so it was a relatively quick 5 hour operation. I'm sure there were other, more difficult separations between the 1950s and the 1990s when Carson's separation happened. (And Carson's wasn't terribly successful for the patients. Every pair of siamese twins seems to be unique, so the survival/quality of life of the patients can depend more on quirks of anatomy than on surgical competence.)

Religion

So? Lots of doctors are religious, and lots are not. What of it? Sophie^Wilder 11:46, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Looks like another stub resulting from an entry in RW:TODO. I'm more and more inclined to think that page should be nixed.--ZooGuard (talk) 11:58, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Tell me no before I write the rest? Feel free to direct me to something else.------Dgener8 (talk) 12:20, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

The "nixed" part referred to RW:TODO. The problem with this page is that at the moment it's a stub that doesn't make clear why the person should be covered by this wiki.--ZooGuard (talk) 12:27, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Because he's highly-qualified and (so he is) influential. Presumably that's why it's added on the todo list. ·Femilisk™ 14:11, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

If this article will never be longer than the current three sentences, suggest merging into this -- Carson is now listed @ CMI. Father Vivian O'Blivion (talk) 14:15, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Is this Article Needed

Is this article needed? I know how to get down, I know how to fight! I bark very little but I know how to fight! I know how to chase a cat up in a tree: man people were FINISHED for messing with me! (talk) 03:45, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

He's a creationist AND a contestant for the Republican nomination, that alone would merit him an RW space. Do you think that Carson isn't "RW worthy", period, or that the current article is too crappily written? ScepticWombat (talk) 08:39, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

The thing is, I see why this is important but I think the organization could be a lot better and explained, not just a smear of bulletins under Carson's Beliefs I know how to get down, I know how to fight! I bark very little but I know how to fight! I know how to chase a cat up in a tree: man people were FINISHED for messing with me! (talk) 08:53, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Ah okay. Well, feel free to add some more context and perhaps how his loopy ideas are generally quite typical of the loony right which, unfortunately, has really gotten its teeth into the GOP (gay bashing, War on Poverty Poor People, creationism, ultra-laissez faire economics, anti-abortion, tying anything bad, e.g. school shootings, to whatever "liberal" bugbear springs to mind and so on and so forth). ScepticWombat (talk) 09:37, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

After digging a bit, it appears he actually does believe this stuff. I guess I just found it unlikely an accomplished before could believe this and myself believed it to be a smear. I, SAID, NO! ABSOLUTELY NOT! GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD, OR I'LL PUT IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD! (talk) 09:40, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Getting a higher education doesn't, sadly, make you immune to really effed up ideas or the nastier kinds of politicking. ScepticWombat (talk) 09:42, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Carson is basically a technician, albeit a highly trained one. Being an MD — just like being an engineer — doesn't automatically make one a scientist. There are MDs who are scientists, just as there are engineers who are scientists, but they are in the minority. Bongolian (talk) 17:31, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Interestingly, we have an article called Engineers and woo, so apparently, this is a thing.--PosthumanHeresy (talk) 03:36, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

"Carson is basically a technician" This is surprisingly very true, or at least what I've been told by doctors over the years. In the same way that I'd only take a Ferrari to the best mechanic in town, I'd want Carson digging around in my kid's head, but I wouldn't trust that mechanic to do my taxes and I wouldn't trust Carson to use those taxes wisely. Petey Plane (talk) 23:26, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

About the Warshaw Uprising

I read, that it would've worked marginally better, if the Polish resistance and other groups would've helped or something.--Arisboch ☞✍☜☞✉☜ 17:21, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Where do you stand on the gun control debate? Plutoniumboss (talk) 01:34, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Quietly chuckling all the way to the bank

"'We had people who didn't really seem to understand finances,' a laughing Carson told CNN's Poppy Harlow on CNN Newsroom, adding, 'or maybe they did—maybe they were doing it on purpose.'" Aside from coming out and saying that he was only in the race to sell books and get a job commentating on Fox News, this is probably as close as we'll get to Carson coming out and saying his candidacy has always been a scam. No surprise that the majority of his small donation monetary supporters appear to be the elderly. Petey Plane (talk) 18:45, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

That's what I thought at first as well, especially when he cancelled a stop to plug his book, but the more he says weird nonsense and stays in the race the more I get the sense he doesn't quite know what he's doing. -EmeraldCityWanderer (talk) 22:34, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Racism

"Carson is an excellent pick because he will fight for the right to discriminate against people who look like Carson." Isn't this a little racist because doesn't this 'people who look like Carson'say all black people look alike which is a racist stereotype.^{— Unsigned, by: St.~Emi / talk / contribs}

On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: on the toolbar above the edit panel. You can also indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line. Thank you..

Anyway, addressing the point here: that's a common turn of phrase used to mean "people with the same visually identifiable trait." For example, "Richard Spencer wants to exterminate everyone who doesn't look like him." It's not meant literally. Spriggina (prat) (insatser) @ 20:45, 23 March 2020 (UTC)