March for Science

Shall this thread be named

  • Total voters
    10
LittleLissa said:
No offense but as EH is dogged in posting his comments, and to the point of lack of sensitivity to others views and sentiments,- (Think back to pre and post US election for example)... I don't think we should spare a minute or a thought for his feelings. He obviously has thick skin and can choose to post in a less aggressive way, on different topics, or less frequently. It's his choice, and he seems to enjoy an argument. It's a mystery to me, if I had these views I would find somewhere to post them where they would at least be appreciated, rather than riling people day in, day out. This is his choice. I'm not interested in entering the argument beyond saying that though, so no further comments from me.
Click to expand...
We mention echo chambers a lot and trying to get past them. My disappointment arises when in argument no good counters are offered. Only insults to ones intellegence for disagreeing. So that in the end even though you are avoiding an echo chamber, no use comes from it regardless.
 
James said:
Ok let's see if I can upset everyone, in one single post lol. :)

1) I think @Stu raised a good thread here, it's interesting to me to see some of the information he posted.

2) Stu changed the thread title for a joke and EH wasn't bothered by it. I changed it back, but only to try to keep to the topic raised.

3) There's some disagreement about the issues raised. From what I can see EH is generally in favor of spending on science, but isn't happy about climate change research spending, and doesn't want to see science made "political".

4) @invisible isn't in agreement with EH.

Ok.

Stu has set out where the budget changes are, and at least in the case of NASA from what I can see, the cuts are relatively mild, in comparison to other federal budget changes. That's not to say these changes won't impact issues.

"The March for Science" though is global. From what I can see it's scientists and experts in their field, protesting against what they think is political interference in their work. This is by no means confined to America.

I agree with their action where it remains objective. But I'm not marching anywhere, I'm too old lol. I see science spending as a vital investment. But I agree with @Cindy and I think that's largely a fair way to put things.

Whilst I'd love to see the Europa mission reinstated, I don't expect America to fund projects based on my "Star Trek" fascination with space exploration. Lol.

Oh and I think it's fine to disagree on issues, that's not the case in some countries whose scientists will not be protesting anything, or they'd be in jail, or worse.
Click to expand...
You need to take a much closer look at March for Science. Maybe it's changed but here in America the vast majority was based on anything other than science.
 
invisible said:
Yes, it certainly is ironic that you decide to describe him as an alternative voice, considering that his voice insists that alternative voices should be deprived of votes, and that socialist voices are a burden to society, and that rendition and torture are perfectly reasonable services to the state. lol
Click to expand...
Rendition and torture are ok in regard to ideas? When did I say that?
 
CindyLou said:
Scientific evidence doesn't imply the adoption of a policy and the rejection of it isn't the rejection of science or scientific evidence. There are tradeoffs to consider.

Science is at risk for turning into a special interest.
Click to expand...
Thank you reasonable voice!
 
invisible said:
I shall gladly STFU and keep the peace for the sake of what you have explained. However, I will maintain that it is futile to listen to any person who deliberately shows that they will consistently refuse to listen to anything that alternative voices in society will ever say, and that this is what Eventhorizon contributes to this forum, and that this is how he constantly behaves on this forum.
Click to expand...
I dont not listen to ideas proven or shown not to work. I will not accept the idea that my hard work allows for others to not work. No one shall ever convince me to otherwise. Perhaps it os you who don't know how to listen?
 
invisible said:
That makes absolutely no sense. It is not reasonable to reach conclusions on policy decisions that are enacted because other policy decisions might possibly be enacted later on? That is totally nonsensical. Of course it makes more sense to reach conclusions on policy decisions that have been enacted than potential policy decisions that might possibly later be enacted. LOL.
Click to expand...
The point being is that it is too early to tell what Trumps intent regarding science in general is.
 
Eventhorizon said:
You need to take a much closer look at March for Science. Maybe it's changed but here in America the vast majority was based on anything other than science.
Click to expand...

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsit...or-science-was-a-dumb-idea/19729#.WQCjpqJw_Dc

If you think that I don't look at the 'counter view' and the negatives EH ? I do. I'm not interested in science becoming a political football for any party or cause. Those who said Trump would decimate NASA resources, so far appear to be incorrect. I think the sooner the senior positions are filled the better, so that budgets are examined by those with scientific expertise. The March for Science is a protest, that goes far past America.

In the west, there are scientists working to resolve all manner of problems, medical, environmental, theoretical etc. I would like to see that expand and grow. I see spending there as an investment. Protest and even dissent are a proof of freedom, provided they don't become destructive. I bet there aren't many North Korean scientists protesting right now. To me that gives a sense of perspective to the way the world is.
 
Eventhorizon said:
We mention echo chambers a lot and trying to get past them. My disappointment arises when in argument no good counters are offered. Only insults to ones intellegence for disagreeing. So that in the end even though you are avoiding an echo chamber, no use comes from it regardless.
Click to expand...

I’m not personally attacking you, just offering my perspective on what I see taking place.
People offer you really good arguments and proof...not just myself, but many here.
You dismiss and ignore it if it isn’t in line with what you personally believe to be true, or if you dislike the source even if it has sources of it’s own to really legit places and studies.
"Only insults to ones intellegence for disagreeing.”
This is totally hypocritical when you have a thread basically calling all liberally minded people stupid and ignorant.
And yes, you have said that certain peoples who’s political ideology isn’t in lock-step with you - should not be allowed to vote.
I’m not attacking your intelligence EH, I’m sure you are a very intelligent person IRL.
People get frustrated when you won’t look at factual information presented, and/or dismiss it outright, never addressing it, instead often mocking that person for believing such things or claiming that the poster hasn’t read all the information posted - which is also insulting to the intelligence of that person.
Your - Liberals are outdated and stupid thread is the perfect example of you creating your own echo chamber, either that, or it’s an outright attempt to annoy people who are different in their political views.
It’s like trying to debate a wall...it’s give and take...it’s keeping an open mind about what we have been told is true.
I don’t claim that all I post on my Merkabah page is true...most of it is speculative at best...I readily admit that.
And if I post about something in any thread, I would appreciate if others would point out to me where I am wrong if I am.
If anyone can show me actual proof that what they say is true...I will admit I made a mistake and change the way I believe in that thing.
But refusing to even look at the proof...because it challenges our personal belief systems, or you dislike that person, or you have made up your mind and refuse to even entertain other viewpoints or facts that could criticize and/or force change of your own beliefs, is not creating an atmosphere of open and amicable discussion.
Have a nice day.
 
Last edited:
Difficult to fill positions when the opposition makes it so difficult.
 
James said:
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsit...or-science-was-a-dumb-idea/19729#.WQCjpqJw_Dc

If you think that I don't look at the 'counter view' and the negatives EH ? I do. I'm not interested in science becoming a political football for any party or cause. Those who said Trump would decimate NASA resources, so far appear to be incorrect. I think the sooner the senior positions are filled the better, so that budgets are examined by those with scientific expertise. The March for Science is a protest, that goes far past America.

In the west, there are scientists working to resolve all manner of problems, medical, environmental, theoretical etc. I would like to see that expand and grow. I see spending there as an investment. Protest and even dissent are a proof of freedom, provided they don't become destructive. I bet there aren't many North Korean scientists protesting right now. To me that gives a sense of perspective to the way the world is.
Click to expand...
Right. So as you can imagine I am a big supporter of science. The more money we can spend on it the better. So when I hear things like missions to study Europa have been put on hold or stopped, that is saddening. Still there's only so much money to be had to spend on any number of things. We can debate that too much money is being spent in one area and should reallocated...but that's a long discussion. There's are those who would rather see more money spent on education and would gladly take away from space exploration to do that.
My overall point is that I think it's ridiculous to say at this point Trump has instituted a war on science as protesters here would have you believe.
I dont just accept things at value. I didn't even do that with Obama. Granted I don't spend every free minute researching but I do look at things like sources and actual quotes as opposed to speculation.
So here, all i was trying to point out is that people had only been given a very high level view of the cuts that were instantly demonized. I thought it to be a good point. I incurred with that I thought unreasonable for doing nothing other than asking questions rather than making statements.

No big deal in the end.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Yes, I honestly believe I could in fact cure cancer and aids if I chose
Click to expand...


*crawls out of hiding to tell a joke*
*clears throat*
*taps microphone*

Is this thing on? Ok.

What's the difference between Hitler choosing to murder millions of human beings and some dude choosing to allow millions of human beings to suffer and die?

Nothing...

*takes a bow*
*crawls back into hiding*



PS I don't know what thread the cancer and aids claim came from, if an argument ensued, or if anything has already been resolved, nor do I care. Good day.*hugs*
 
Milktoast Bandit said:
*crawls out of hiding to tell a joke*
*clears throat*
*taps microphone*

Is this thing on? Ok.

What's the difference between Hitler choosing to murder millions of human beings and some dude choosing to allow millions of human beings to suffer and die?

Nothing...

*takes a bow*
*crawls back into hiding*



PS I don't know what thread the cancer and aids claim came from, if an argument ensued, or if anything has already been resolved, nor do I care. Good day.*hugs*
Click to expand...

Great to see you back @Milktoast Bandit . :)

I can take a hint, I'll change my socks. But I think saying my foot odour killed millions is exaggerating. They probably wanted to die, but that's different.

Hope all is well milky. "You're a righteous dude".
 
Milktoast Bandit said:
*crawls out of hiding to tell a joke*
*clears throat*
*taps microphone*

Is this thing on? Ok.

What's the difference between Hitler choosing to murder millions of human beings and some dude choosing to allow millions of human beings to suffer and die?

Nothing...

*takes a bow*
*crawls back into hiding*



PS I don't know what thread the cancer and aids claim came from, if an argument ensued, or if anything has already been resolved, nor do I care. Good day.*hugs*
Click to expand...
I'm not your your slave.
 
Capture.webp http://www.iflscience.com/environment/energy-department-climate-office-banned-phrase-climate-change/
 
Last edited:
Stu said:
View attachment 35290 http://www.iflscience.com/environment/energy-department-climate-office-banned-phrase-climate-change/
Click to expand...

1) Co2 is a heavier than air gas, that traps heat.

2) human beings have been burning fossil fuels that emit co2 and have significantly increased the amount of co2 in the atmosphere.

3) The earths climate changes, even without any human contribution or action. The continued melting of the arctic floating ice, and the Greenland ice sheet clearly demonstrate changes are happening.

It's basic to me that even if people disagree that the increased emissions of co2 have impacted the environment (how could it not?) We should be seeking to find cheaper, cleaner energy sources like fusion, or hydrogen, solar etc regardless.

Trying to ban debate or discussion is wrong in a free society.
 
James said:
1) Co2 is a heavier than air gas, that traps heat.

2) human beings have been burning fossil fuels that emit co2 and have significantly increased the amount of co2 in the atmosphere.

3) The earths climate changes, even without any human contribution or action. The continued melting of the arctic floating ice, and the Greenland ice sheet clearly demonstrate changes are happening.

It's basic to me that even if people disagree that the increased emissions of co2 have impacted the environment (how could it not?) We should be seeking to find cheaper, cleaner energy sources like fusion, or hydrogen, solar etc regardless.

Trying to ban debate or discussion is wrong in a free society.
Click to expand...
CO2 is a natural gas. It is an has been part of earths atmosphere for billions of years.

Let's find alternative fuel sources and clean up our environment but let's not do it for reasons that come from lies.
 
@Stu
Again, global warming is in question for some but not the majority. It sad when people who do not believe in global warming are made to sound as if they speak for everyone.
Man made global warming has not been proven. Moreover with the data we have, it is shown to be unlikely. However I agree there is enough of a question to where research should be done to find out if man has any impact. Researched not based on a beginning foundation that it probably does.

The ice age ended 40 thousand years ago thanks to global warming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top