Do you agree with the march for science?

File: 1492535214082.png (49KB, 477x421px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 477x421px

no

I dont even know what it is

>>8840688
they're the SJWs of science

File: 1425416018786.jpg (256KB, 800x680px) Image search: [Google]

256KB, 800x680px

>>8840683
I would love to 'march' 'for' 'science' and hopefully change Trump's mind on environmental, climate, regulatory, academic and research policies.

BUT [math]\bf{FUCK}[/math] Communism and Communist accessories.

File: ChangingMinds.jpg (46KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 640x640px

>>8840683
Yes, I do.
>>8840684
WTF?

It's this Saturday (April 22). Science-oriented folks will march to show numbers of people who are adamant enough about the importance of science to show up and be counted.

do libs still hate animal research?

File: Cat_Yawn.gif (1007KB, 500x277px) Image search: [Google]

1007KB, 500x277px

>>8840697
>BUT FUCK Communism and Communist accessories.

You're an idiot. The whole idea of science is that it is verifiable regardless of political, religious, or emotional perspective.

Bu t I get it. This is /b/, and we're all getting our lulls from posts like this where we "hurr durr" our point. Ha ha ha.,... ha. gee, that made me kek

marches are pointless if they aren't used to organized people into a movement.

look at 2008-2010 period in american history.

>occupy wall street. smelly hippies and commies protest in the streets for months. fucking nothing gets done. even with democrats in complete control of the government.
>republicans upset over obama being elected and obamacare being passed. they hold rallies and form the tea party. in 2010 they get a lot of new republicans elected. these new politicians shake things up in congress. leads to every increasing republican control of federal and state governments.

File: UNDERDOG+SIMON+BARSINISTER+LURKS.jpg (401KB, 1008x938px) Image search: [Google]

401KB, 1008x938px

>>8840813
Libs, yes. Scientists, not so much. Necessary evil type thing, but there are the fuck-all types.

>>8840825
>marches are pointless if they aren't used to organized people into a movement.
So... given your Tea Party example and the rise of the unthinking jingoists, wouldn't you say they succeeded in making a difference?

>>8840831
yes.

>>8840817
>The whole idea of science is that it is verifiable

popsci kiddie detected.

>>8840836
Nice try at minimizing. But the truth stands. Predictable, modeled shit happens despite your political or religious leaders telling you otherwise.

The most obvious off these idiots are of course the flat-Earthers, although I suppose some of those just want to see if anyone has their brain engaged.

File: 2dc96057271be2f9b36773fa222d0ce7a2d7308fde57d23dc5d09dff0300b482.jpg (74KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 720x960px

>>8840697
t. classcuck

>>8840813
Not in the mainstream, I don't think. Usually it's just the vegan wackos who think that new shampoos use a pound of caustic soda until we see it kill enough puppies.
You could ask people if they accept the consensus on transgenic crop safety, but that's not a strictly liberal thing either, seeing as how often the woo crowd attacks them on here.

>>8840683
No.

I already talked about this in the previous threads, but this "march for science" is NOT really about bringing scientific awareness to the public and pushing for evidence based policies.
But foremost about pushing a clear leftist agenda as a backlash against the right leaning US government.

If you dont believe me read their own website.

>>8841354
It is an aggregation of free people and the people trying to organize are making many tragic tactical errors. Make your own sign and stay on topic, or better yet throw a small protest, voice your dissent, that's the acts that really make a difference.

File: ClippyCaps.jpg (30KB, 454x453px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 454x453px

>>8841354
As it happens, the "right leaning US government" is very anti-science. If you consider science as "leftist," then that's your way of passing science off as a trivial pursuit to justify your own laziness.
But it's not an accurate analysis.
You should try an immerse yourself in say, NASA, replete with right-wing, God-fearing folk. Science is not about politics. It's problem-solving, and modeling of our world to understand it.
You're just a simpleton and can't get past the fact that others have brain capacity. Sorry!

>>8840683

FUCK no. It's an attempt to get people to think that leftism is scientifically supported. Leftists are just tagging on a name to their shitty march to make it seem more 'right'. They would call it 'march for activated walnuts' and it would change NOTHING about the movement. The left is trying to co-opt science and get people to think that leftism is the only 'scientific' political view.

The thought proccess they're trying to achieve in the average joe:

> see march for science
> know I like science
> see that there's a bunch of scientists for leftism
> leftism must be a pretty darn sensible choice if a bunch of scientists are marching for it
> become less defensive to leftism.

Inb4 there's a bunch of non scientist people in scientific looking labcoats just to project an image.

Just to be completely clear: the Marc I for science has NOTHING to do with science.

>>8840683
There's poison in the water. I doubt a lot of scientists from non-politicized fields (eyes on climate scientists) will be there anyway. These kinds of hyper-public Facebook-tier "for science" events tend to wind up with a lot of narcissists with intellectual superiority complexes who couldn't tell you the SI unit for pressure.

>>8840684
www.marchforscience.com/marcher-pledge/
>We will:

>Fight discrimination, exploitation, and inequity in the scientific community.

>Work to make sure that scientific research and scientific careers are made more accessible to people from historically underrepresented and marginalized backgrounds.

www.marchforscience.com/diversity-principles/

>Inclusion, diversity, equity, and accessibility are central to the mission and principles of the March for Science.

>Systems of privilege influence who becomes a part of the science community
> some scientific endeavors have been used to harm and oppress marginalized communities
>Political actions -- such as gag orders for government science agencies, funding freezes, immigration bans
>Science itself can drive our conversations about the importance of diversity
>We pledge to amplify the work of underrepresented scientists

>>8840808
Creationism makes more sense than neo-Darwinism. But too many atheists are philosophically inept and emotionally unstable to even debate.

Also Ken Ham actually has a science degree in biology whereas Nye is a mechanical engineer and hasn't actually published at all.

But both Ham and Nye are popularizers. It's telling because evolutionists never make citations of more credible and better educated creation scientists.

>>8841354
>But foremost about pushing a clear leftist agenda as a backlash against the right leaning US government.
Because the anti-science crews are mostly right. Anti-evolution in schools, anti-climate change in policy, anti-funding of scientific programs in general to account for inflation in particular (which is currently the line being used to increase military spending).
That doesn't exclude the left from nonsense such as anti-vax and anti-GMO.
It just so happens that this particular government is looking to slash funding to most scientific federal agencies, you better believe that would mobilize them even independent of the anti-science policies of the administration.

Other industries do this all the time - banking, insurance, agriculture, manufacturing. The point is to start lobbying like business interests since that is increasingly how the right thinks science should operate.

Scientific information moves at a snail's pace compared with sensational articles posted rapid fire on the internet, usually with few ways to check the claims made. Science has to adapt to that changing climate, or fade into complete obscurity.

File: IMG_1526.gif (1MB, 480x287px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 480x287px

>>8840817
>You're an idiot. The whole idea of science is that it is verifiable regardless of political, religious, or emotional perspective.

>>8840845
>2017
>still can't tell if eggs are good for you
>still can't tell if soy is good for you
go to /fit/, watch people throw shitty exercise journals at each other, then conclude that 1g/lb bodyweight protein consumption + squats + deadlifts is the only way to go
this is your (((science))) and (((critical thinking))) at work

>>8841613
This

As as a pretty far right guy it really piss me off that idiot liberals are always trying to co-opt science

>>8841643
It's pretty big stretch to call Climate change "science" considering how polarized it is now.

>>8841677
>It's pretty big stretch to call Climate change "science" considering how polarized it is now.

The goalposts keep moving. A decade ago the "question" was whether climate change existed, now it has since moved to if the climate change we see is human caused or part of some natural cycle.
Agricultural communities in almost all parts of the United States will tell you that their growing seasons are longer (or shorter) with strained water resources and changing environment which affects the crops that can grow there. Wine vineyards from California will "emigrate" East, rice fields in South Carolina to the West, and avocado production will simple cease to exist in many parts. And these were staple crops for some of these regions since the Civil war or even earlier, the Revolutionary War.

The Florida everglades ARE going to disappear shortly, and chronic flooding now threatens almost any beach adjacent property there (its also why some Republican legislators in Florida recognize climate change).

This isn't a partisan issue. It's purely manufactured to appear so.

>>8841677
>some pun about poles
It's a pretty big stretch to call 0.99...==1 "math" considering how polarized it is now.

>>8840683

It's sponsored by Verily (owned by Alphabet aka Google), so no.

>>8841591
Please read again what I said. I think you misunderstood completely.

To summarize: The "march for science" is not about science but foremost about leftist politics. Read their website.

>>8841643
>Because the anti-science crews are mostly right.
So fucking what? Does that mean that EVERY criticism against them must be from the left.
Especially, as you stated, because the left has their science denialists too.

You can argue for evidence based policies WITHOUT arguing for leftist policies.

There is no inherent connection between wanting policies based on science and far left policies.

File: fas.png (158KB, 499x339px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 499x339px

>>8841933

>>8840684
What a bunch of faggots.

>>8841957
What is your problem?

I don't think you realize that the "march for science" should have NO political ideology and that not everyone who isnt a member of the far left is a nazi.

Do you really not understand that I am not arguing for any kind of policies but instead I argue that the "march for science" should be about science and ONLY science?

>>8840875
>that definition of fascism
There was nothing fascist in there

>>8841979

But it is.

>>8841979
The far left has the need to label anyone who opposes them as a fascist.

That pic is one of the stupidest things I have ever seen.

Communism has already wrecked many nation and killed hundreds of millions and they are attempting to normalize their totalitarian ideology by defining anyone who opposes them (aka. has a brain) as a nazi.

>>8840875
t. economically illiterate faggot

>>8841982
Not for any person who is either sane or has any knowledge about politics.

>>8841985

Whats up fellow stormcuck

You have to go back

>>>/pol/

File: 1474919616797.jpg (25KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 480x480px

>>8841957
>National Socialism
>right wing

>>8841988
>stormcuck

Are you schizophrenic? Nothing I said relates to specific policies or has anything to do with right wing ideas.
I only said that I want to have NO politics in science.

Either you should seek professional help or realize that your ideology makes you hate everyone who doesnt hold the same viwes as you.

>>8841990
Intelligence was never a strong point of the far left.

File: SRhIavC.jpg (218KB, 1918x1074px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 1918x1074px

>>8841992

>Either you should seek professional help or realize that your ideology makes you hate everyone who doesnt hold the same viwes as you

You should def do that, yeah. Oh, you werent asking for advice?

Don't be silly anon and stop projecting.

>>8841997
Please tell me what I said that in ANY way relates to me being even moderately right wing.

Not some strawman, actual quotes.

File: 1490454293639.png (273KB, 793x794px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 793x794px

>>8841996
>implying I'm far-left because I acknowledge that national socialism isn't a leftist ideology
>implying I'm leftist at all

>>8842001
Is a leftist ideology*

>>8842001
I was talking about that retard who made the pic...

>>8840808

Cuck.

>>8842004
That makes more sense

>>8841640
>philosophically inept
This is a virtue

>Neo Darwinism
I'm guessing you mean modern synthesis, and I completely don't see why you'd have a problem with that

>educated creation scientists
Oxymoron

>>8841640
>science degree in biology
He just has a bachelor. That doesn't make him an expert on the subject.
He also believes that the Universe is 6000 years old which is pretty unscientific.

>>8842018
> This is a virtue
Thank you for signaling how retard you are. This complements your last comment.

Redditfag

>>8842030
My point was that Ham is more qualified than Nye to speak on the matter. At least Ham is familiar with the arguments for evolution whereas Nye just shows up for the money.

There's Dawkins won't debate scientists like Sarfati.

> 6000 years old
Which it is. However it's unlikely you are familiar with the arguments for a young-Earth. creation.com or answersingenesis provide the evidence and relevant studies to back up their claims.

>>8842103
This has to be bait

>>8842103
>Thank you for signaling how retard you are
Name one accomplishment of philosophy
Oops

>This complements your last comment
That was my first comment itt

>Redditfag
Says the person using reddit spacing

>>8840683
It's not a march for science, it's a march for 'progressive' politics using science as a veneer of impartial credibility.

>>8842118
What the fuck do you expect when trump defunds the EPA and Pence is a young earth creationist, who wants to teach it as an alternative in schools

why the fuck would I even want to march for science. I want to rot in the lab, leave me alone

>>8841643
The anti-nuclear left is easily the most ignorant, damaging anti-science force in politics. They are more to blame for climate change than everybody on the right put together.

>>8842127
ha.
ha.
ha.

>>8842103
>However it's unlikely you are familiar with the arguments for a young-Earth.
I am familiar with it. It moslty comes down to religious, theological or philosophical arguments which are not scientific arguments. It doesn't explain the observations of nature duch as radiometric dating, geological observations of the formations of mountains, orogeny, astronomy ... The earth is around 4.5 billion years old.

>>8841613
What's more likely to happen is average joe who hates being called a racist by the media 24/7 now also hates science because it is associated with leftism

>>8841667
>>8841613
See >>8842122
Stop supporting anti-science or stop whining

>>8840684
yea no thanks

>>8842122
>What the fuck do you expect when trump defunds the EPA and Pence is a young earth creationist, who wants to teach it as an alternative in schools
I expect (and I honestly believe that this is justified) that protest FOR science should not be about a certain clearly leftist political agenda.

Leftist may protest as they wish but they SHOULD NEVER be allowed to do that by abusing science.

You realize that this "march for science", led by leftist ideologues hurts the public image of science and the appeal of science a lot more then it helps?

Do you honestly think that it is a good Idea that science should be a tool used by ideologues? Do you really want that? Ideologues have always used "science" to push their ideas, Stalin did it, Hitler did it and both times it significantly HURT science. Why? Because SCIENCE HAS NO IDEOLOGY and equipping it with one is the most unscientific thing you can do.

>>8840683
Yes. I'm a scientist and I'll be marching.

>>8842183

Listen to yourself. You're telling people on the math and science board to stop being anti science. This is the extent of the left's mental gymnastics. We're whining for a good reason.

>>8842258
You're assuming everybody on a math and science board support math and science, and aren't just low-IQ trolls visiting from the white supremacy board.

>>8842183
stop being a brainlet

>>8842258
>You're telling people on the math and science board to stop being anti science
There are people obviously people here who support the republicans, who are like the anti science party of the entire fucking planet

>>8842248
The conservatives should fucking stop denying it, maybe that's the solution, rather than leftists supporting science

It's >>8842367 again,
>>8842248 actually does sound very reasonable and they shouldn't appropriate science to push their agenda, but the problem in the first place, and the reason this is possible is science denial by most of the republican party

>>8842363

Leftists at their finest. Saying that if you support republicans you must be anti science. You are Litterally fucking retarded, did you know that?

File: 17760040_1873874169535545_8405590880466519797_n.png (128KB, 629x276px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 629x276px

>>8841979
Fascism as a historical movement always comes from capitalism in decay. It amounts to the uncritical, absolute defense of capital under the weight of its own contradictions, and appropriates left-wing rhetoric and iconography to this end. It serves only to smash imminent proletarian revolution.
You kind of have to understand the state as a device of class rule in the first place, or you're hopelessly unequipped to grasp any of the 20th century

>>8841987
(You)

>>8842000
You said it yourself, if you're against them you're a Nazi.

>>8840808
>one of these men is an actual scientist
>the other is a clown on TV for little children

Hmm, which one would I rather listen to?

>>8842602
>only retards think that supporting the anti-science party in its anti-science policies makes you anti-science

>>8842248
>no position on any issue can ever claim to be scientific, "pro-science," or in line with the scientific consensus and best evidence we have, and anyone who disagrees is literally hitler

>>8842000
>Please tell me what I said that in ANY way relates to me being even moderately right wing.
The assessment you made here >>8841985
>The far left has the need to label anyone who opposes them as a fascist.
is a pretty uniquely right-wing position.

>>8841667
>As as a pretty far right guy it really piss me off that idiot liberals are always trying to co-opt science

Bingo. I'm doing a PhD in a STEM field, it pisses me off when I hear a bunch of left-wing journals and bloggers (who majored in humanities or arts) lecture me about how they "support" science or whatever.

>>8840831
>and the rise of the unthinking jingoists

But the antifa faggots have managed to accomplish even less than OWS ever did, so what's your point retard?

File: 1467098362831.jpg (49KB, 300x392px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 300x392px

>>8841643
>Because the anti-science crews are mostly right.

The left literally thinks that truth doesn't exist because it is racist. You can't have science without truth existing. Also, unironically believing in climate change makes you a legitimate retard. Sorry kiddo.

>>8842127
This.

>>8842129
Dude, where's your argument?

>>8841643
>The point is to start lobbying like business interests since that is increasingly how the right thinks science should operate.

You do realize it has been operating this way for decades right? It's funny that you deride military spending when all of our most advance scientific research comes from the top secret black sector of the budget which gave us GPS and cellular technology. I don't see how myself not wanting someone to steal from me so they can use those resources to put shrimp on treadmills is "anti-science".

File: a56db3cd7174dcd3c99e3d0fa4afadfc3078a9b2.png (2MB, 3038x3485px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3038x3485px

>>8843130
>The left literally thinks that truth doesn't exist because it is racist.
Yeah, that's the "social justice" crowd, and in no substantial sense are they "left." Subjective idealism is always a reactionary position which obscures the real mechanics of human society and stands at odds with historical materialism; /pol/ and tumblr merely substitute one identity group for the other in their politics.

File: 1449691040743.jpg (2MB, 1500x3400px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1500x3400px

>>8843179
Cliffnotes for the lazy

>>8841698
>The goalposts keep moving. A decade ago the "question" was whether climate change existed, now it has since moved to if the climate change we see is human caused or part of some natural cycle.

Sounds like its less goal posts being moved and a consensus is forming. The fact you called it moving a goal post, indicates that you reflexively moved to counter with emotions rather than thinking. Which just goes to show exactly how politicized the issue has become.

>>8840683
I don't know. I don't really care. I get that it affects me but it's also just a bunch of douchebags marching for their own interests. Wow, scientists support funding for science, who would have thought? It's almost as if people think whatever they do is really important and like being given money for it.

>>8843130
>You can't have science without truth existing. Also, unironically believing in climate change makes you a legitimate retard
ironing

>>8843130
>Dude, where's your argument?
It's laughable that the proportion of progressives who are anti-nuclear and don't deny science are more damaging to science than the fucking republicans. The fucking republicans, who believe vaccines cause autism, the world was made in seven days and want to teach creationism in schools, who deny climate change, who literally come up with whatever facts it takes to keep their shitty anti truth and alternative fact-based ideology afloat

I'm talking about americans, as I'm assuming you were. Here in europe conservatives can actually be vaguely reasonably about science sometimes

>>8843377
Science is not about consensus.

>>8844460
Yeah, it's about individual opinion, you just choose the idiot on youtube who agrees with your initial intuitions, that's how science is done

>>8844463
You misunderstood. I am arguing against the notion of science being "settled". Science is not about consensus, it is about evidence and the degree to which that evidence supports theory. The majority of evidence appears to agree with AGW theory, but it is grossly unscientific to refuse evaluation of research that suggests otherwise.

>>8844487
sounds reasonable
if experts agree however where the ecidence points then that's really the best approximation of reality, and it's what policy makers should look at

>>8844196
Conservatives are subject to much more ridicule for their retarded beliefs. Meanwhile, we're pissing money away at meme renewable energy projects because we have to appease screeching democrats who will never bother to understand nuclear power beyond "reactor = chernobyl = apocalypse."

>>8844830
>Conservatives are subject to much more ridicule for their retarded beliefs
And they currently have the fucking congress and everything, not enough ridicule maybe?
At least it's something, that democrat candidates don't deny climate change in the first place

>>8844837
>Implying their blind hatred of GMOs, nuclear power, wireless, fracking, pipelines, etc is any better

>>8844847
>any better
yes
here's two ways

1)AGW is a bigger issue than those things
2)there are some who have a 'blind hatred', but there's also a lot of people that don't

meanwhile, the only people who agree AGW is real on the right are OK with it since they think it will only affect people living around the equator - subhumans, so who cares
"fewer africans, indians, southern europeans, mexicans"
this is the thought process

>>8840683
Of course not. It's been coopted before it's even out the gate. I doubt it was ever "scientific" or about science policy. It's scheduled for Earth Day and the logo has a little Earth, so I'm going to guess it's climate change advocacy.

Nothing like thousands of people flying in on jets to raise awareness about global warming.

>>8844871
>meanwhile, the only people who agree AGW is real on the right are OK with it since they think it will only affect people living around the equator - subhumans, so who cares
>"fewer africans, indians, southern europeans, mexicans"
>this is the thought process
This is the thinking that got trump elected, painting people, even moderate people, into a corner as incredible racists

>>8844883
>moderate
are you going to pretend you aren't a /pol/fag right now

>>8844894
I actually support the democrats an awful lot, here in germany I vote SPD which is SocDem, but saying that racism is such a huge issue alienates moderates, it's simply true

>>8844492
>if experts agree however where the ecidence points
Yes except for the equally qualified "experts" that don't

Climate scientists argument to contradictory evidence is "well 99% of us agree, so you must be the lunatic in the room" which is hardly persuasive tbqfhwy

>>8844904
a lot of the AGW denial on here is on racial grounds

File: 1415387760843.jpg (15KB, 300x544px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 300x544px

http://reason.com/archives/2017/04/21/scientists-march-on-washington

>Microbiologist Alex Berezow is a senior fellow of biomedical science at a pro-science consumer advocacy organization, the American Council on Science and Health.* I asked him if he thought scientists should participate in the march. "No, scientists and researchers should not participate," he replied. "From the very outset, the march started as an anti-Trump protest. Then it morphed into a solidly progressive movement, embracing all manner of left-wing social justice causes." Berezow added that the march could well end up harming the interests of the scientific community: "For decades, science has received broad bipartisan support. (In fact, Republicans usually funded science better than Democrats.) By biting the hand that feeds them, scientists risk losing funding, as well as alienating taxpayers. That is an awful idea, and it hurts everybody."

>>8844883
>>meanwhile, the only people who agree AGW is real on the right are OK with it since they think it will only affect people

It may be I talk to more conservatives than you, being one and all, but this seems incorrect.

In my experience, those of more conservative bent who think AGW is a thing tend to either think it is a smaller thing than the left makes it out to be, or that the nostrums of the left to combat it are poor choices, designed more to advance their unrelated agenda items than to combat climate change.

>>8844894

>>8844871
Is me.
>>8844883
Isn't

I'm not a /pol/fag, I just think you're a retard for >implying that the dems are any better on science than the republicans. Both parties have their asinine beliefs which are holding us back.

>>8844918
Well then there isn't a consensus, and I think academic bodies tend to have very high integrity and wouldn't represent something as a consensus if there isn't one
Also, scientists who are qualified and disagree with AGW would come forward and publish something to speak out if there was a considerable body. If these scientists are there they should make some actual contrary publications

>>8844871
>1)AGW is a bigger issue than those things

Unless it isn't. Many of us who think there is an anthropogenic element to climate change are waiting for evidence that is is as bad as our friends on the left claim, since models predicting change rates and such have been over-blown pretty consistently up to this point, we remain skeptical of that.

>2)there are some who have a 'blind hatred', but there's also a lot of people that don't

A similar statement could be made about the right and AGW -- but of course, on both sides, the loudest and most extreme get the most attention.

>>8844935
>implying that the dems are any better on science than the republicans
They very clearly are, mostly because it fits their economic policy better, partly because of religion. You wont find a democrat who denies evolution, or thinks vaccines cause autism or anything ridicolous like that

>>8844951
thats not true at all. a good chunk of anti-vaxxers are anti-GMO vegan liberal hippy types.

>>8844951
Interesting, I know ones who hate GMOs, radio, vaccinations, nuclear power, internal combustion engines, "chemicals," and a whole host of other things they hate irrationally.

>>8844951
>You wont find a democrat who denies evolution, or thinks vaccines cause autism or anything ridicolous like that
I bet if I flipped enough rocks I could find one somewhere

Being a democrat does not make you more enlightened. I would argue the opposite, since they are so mired in identity politics.

>>8844947
>friends on the left
You mean people who work with the stuff right. the left just agrees with what's put out.
militaries around the world seem to agree as well
>>8844966
>identity politics.
that would would be the right, as evidenced by the approx. 6 race threads focused on spreading lies about blacks on here

>>8844951
>You wont find a democrat who ... thinks vaccines cause autism


>Has never been to Oregon

But more seriously, a quick look at vaccination laws across the states shows a quilt of laws that does not seem to match any specific voting pattern, party-wise: http://vaccines.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=003597

The states with the toughest laws requiring vaccination are West Virginia and Mississippi, hardly bereft of Republicans -- but then California is right in close behind them.

States with laxer laws range from Oregon, where being a Republican is not yet decriminalized, to Texas, where they plan to built The Wall out of local Democrats except there aren't enough of them.

It is probably also worth noting that objections to vaccine requirements come in two flavors -- "I think vaccines are bad," which is the anti-science moron position, and "I think vaccines are good and I vaccinate my kids, but I don't like the government telling me what medical treatment to get," which values a degree of freedom over a degree of safety. To what extent the last has anything to do with being anti-science is, at the very least, debatable.

>>8844974
>>friends on the left

I grew up in the household of a conservative Republican congressman. This was back in the day when folks on opposite sides talked about each other more nicely. I see advantages to that.

And some of my friends ARE pretty far out on the left. Others have other strange quirks. Even I probably have some beliefs that will turn out to be silly.

>>8844988
My best friend is an anarcho capitalist

>>8844988
wat sort of response is that?

>my life story means AGW is made up by friends on the left

>>8844974
>>identity politics.
>that would would be the right
really

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/giana-pacinelli/if-youre-a-woman-you-should-vote-for-hillary-clinton-for-president_b_10396106.html

>>8844974
>militaries around the world seem to agree as well

I am not inordinately surprised that military agencies agree with something that means they need more funding.

In any case, "the military" is not an accredited scientific institution.

(I seem to recall a few instances, here and there, when the military has believed something in error.)

>>8844998
the catalog on here is more relevant than some huffpo article from 1 year ago
why?
because we are on this site and not there

OBVIOUSLY there's identity politics on both sides but you didn't correct this guy>>8844966 did you

fuck off tard
>>8845002
hello, conspiracy theorist
the accredited scientific institutions have already spoken

>>8844995
Reading comprehension is hard.

I never said AGW was made up by the left, I specifically said in >>8844947 that "many of us who believe there is an anthropogenic element to climate change are waiting..." That seems to contradict your claim that I believe AGW is made up by the left.

My response at >>8844988 merely indicated why I say "friends on the left" instead of using the currently more popular bashing each pother approach. Since this is not /pol/, I would hope that would not shock anyone.

>>8845009
>hello, conspiracy theorist

Hi, person who cannot read!

I thought your mentioning the military was a waste of time, since they are not in the business of studying climate change, and they have an ulterior motive.

WQhat an odd world we live inn, when a leftist beleives everything the military says, and a conservative is skeptical about them. McGovern must be spinning in his grave...

And I'm out, we're getting too far into /pol/land at this point. Last word is yours, if you want it.

>>8845015
let me put it simply
it's not the left that says it will be bad
AGW is a big deal BECAUSE it will be bad, that's part of not being a denier

you aren't being clever by saying
"well, guys, it's real I agree, there's just no evidence it will be bad until we see it happen, roflmao"

>>8842103
Shit b8 but people fell for it so congrats I guess.

>>8845023
I said:
>people who are in the business of studying climate change have put the information out
then
>the left believes it
>so does the military

part of the information is that it will be a big issue and in 2017 it already is becoming an issue

File: PatriotU_Crop[1].jpg (36KB, 592x440px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 592x440px

>>8842018
Educated creation scientists have the best degrees they could buy. Are you saying this doesn't look like a real college?

>>8845047
Kek, isn't that where kent hovind bought his degree

File: 1450590859389.png (164KB, 409x325px) Image search: [Google]

164KB, 409x325px

>>8845009
>the catalog on here is more relevant than some huffpo article from 1 year ago
>why?
>because we are on this site and not there
why are you comparing this site and the views espoused here to the views espoused by a formal left-wing publication?

there is no identity politics here beyond maybe, issues that appeal to losers and shut-ins. what you are describing is racism and xenophobia, which are not identity politics.

lurk moar, or actually maybe lurk less. get some info from a place that's not 4chan.

>>8845061
Yes. And it's "accredited" by a place where you can buy accreditation. It's conmen all the way down.

>>8842261
OK
> how dare you not believe that everyone who disagrees with the left is either a troll or a white supremacist

this type of mindset is exactly why you lost the election but hey, you can always blame the russians

>>8840684
Why can't science write a math equation to solve all of those problems?

>>8840817
Oh hey the high school "philosopher" showed up. Please shower us with more pseudo-intellectual ideas of yours to show us how wrong we are and how right you are.

>>8840875
>Horseshoe theory
INTO THE TRASH

>>8840683
It's April and people are still doing science.

File: Brexit-EU-crack.jpg (295KB, 1200x400px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1200x400px

>>8846255
>the elections
ftfy

File: kings.jpg (71KB, 540x402px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 540x402px

>>8845083
>there is no identity politics here beyond maybe, issues that appeal to losers and shut-ins
I assume you mean IQ. There are definitely alt-right identity politics threads started up here using IQ as a springboard to compare in infographics, things that people are likely to take at face value without examining the source. They get summarily debunked every now and then, but, as ideologues tend to do, they just keep ignoring it and hoping it'll go away instead of taking a moment to nuance their positions.
warosu.org/sci/thread/8833056#p8834310

In context, the other extreme IS being represented by the political statement that the March for Science is trying to make. See >>8841624
>Systems of privilege influence who becomes a part of the science community
>Science itself can drive our conversations about the importance of diversity
>We pledge to amplify the work of underrepresented scientists
All indicative of far-left ideologues looking to give biased funding to researchers that will support their political leanings. There's nothing more relevant than the March for Science Web page itself.

>>8846298
>The whole idea of science is that it is verifiable regardless of political, religious, or emotional perspective
>Pseudo-intellectual idea
What the fuck are you saying

File: mfs.png (115KB, 919x1613px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 919x1613px

>>8840683
Yes

>>8844918
>Climate scientists argument to contradictory evidence is "well 99% of us agree, so you must be the lunatic in the room"
It's not. Just look at most climate change threads on /sci/. The deniers are getting destroyed all the time. And it were deniers who came up with the consensus argument in the first place (see Oregon petition).
Climate scientists look at the data and try to derive there theories from there.
Climate change deniers have already formed their opinion and then try to find data which supports it. Which is hardly scientific.

>>8846975
>Just look at most climate change threads on /sci/. The deniers are getting destroyed all the time
not him but this claim lacks merit
>And it were deniers who came up with the consensus argument in the first place
learn to grammar please
>Climate change deniers have already formed their opinion and then try to find data which supports it.
this seems like a false conclusion upon which you have placed little research.

merely seeking anything to the contrary of the dogma seems to elicit a near visceral response as you are displaying. I just wanna seek answers through science not get my funding cut and have a rabid dog shoved down my throat everytime my data doesn't agree with the dogmatic androphobe hypothesis

>>8840684
jfc they hijack everything and as a result drive people to elect Trumps

>>8846949
Thanks for serving your neo-liberal overlord!!!

>>8840683
No. If scientific fields want to be taken seriously again, they need to stop politicizing themselves so much.

There's a difference between being politically active about issues that are important to your field, and injecting yourself as some kind of authority figure into every random political issue. See >>8840684

When researchers and engineers use their credentials to make unrelated political and social arguments and make appeals to authority in place of evidence-based arguments, they should lose all credibility.

No most "scientists" or followers of science don't really follow the scientific method anymore. Also a lot of scientists or backers just sound like religious people at this point. In the name of ... science? (Interchangeable with god)
March for god.

I'm a conservative but I also majored in statistics and math and have an extensive background in biochemistry. Most normies that believe the "facts" blindly from scientists (appeal to authority) don't even study a subject that is STEM related, or at least, that is what is looks like to me, because I don't see any form of skepticism.

Also is it just me or do a lot of normies sound very sociopathic?
"Don't allow the people that don't support or believe the science get the benefits of science"
What the fuck?

>>8841986
>economically illiterate
>spouts the virtues of trickle down voodoonomics
kekadoodledoo

>>8847101
>When researchers and engineers use their credentials to make unrelated political and social arguments and make appeals to authority in place of evidence-based arguments, they should lose all credibility.

Agreed.
>march for science
>but lets appeal to all the normies, popsci kids, and SJWs by advocating for unrelated topics
I'm a FUCKING LEAF so I don't know all the politics behind science funding in 'Murica and shit, but I don't see how a rally like this will change the decisions made by policy makers. If these scientists want to be taken seriously, why don't they start doing more productive things?

No.

>Brainlet left wing arts students
>'scientists'

>>8844918
>Climate scientists argument to contradictory evidence is "well 99% of us agree, so you must be the lunatic in the room" which is hardly persuasive tbqfhwy
Nah

It's more like

>Contradictory evidence
>"Well the evidence from 99% of all the other studies points to AGW so we'll stick with that unless you find a lot more."

>>8840817
>The whole idea of science is that it is verifiable regardless of political, religious, or emotional perspective.
You realize that publication is part of the scientific process right? And you also realize that people who are political/religious/emotional are the ones in charge of review, publication, and the actual interpretation of the results riiiiiiggghht?

Get your head out of your ass, science is as much a social institution as anything else.

>>8840697
fucking this
A well funded EPA would be great, but i do not want to march alongside retarded "ummmm actually border controls are racist sweety" cunts. Actual lobbying is definitely a necessity though.
>>8840875
>misunderstanding this many ideologies in one image
genuinely impressed

>>8841643
The right is:
>Anti-climate change, anti-evolution, anti-funding
The left is:
Against the idea that races are fundamentally different, against scientific economic principles, and against military research.

It's pretty clear that both sides only selectively interpret science to further their own agenda. I reiterate, the March for Science has nothing to do with science.

>>8841988
he LITERALLY said you guys are quick on the "call him a nazi" trigger so you called him a nazi
hahahahahaha fucking christ dude, lift weights please you worm

>>8840683
so are liberals going to fund studies on nuclear power and human genetics now that they love science so much?

>>8841643

The left is against science when it comes to racial and sexual realism. Go ahead and call me a /pol/tard, but it doesn't make me wrong.

>>8840683
I saw a bunch of people with march for science sign. It was so embarrassing just to watch them. In case if anybody is wondering, I live 20 miles off los angles.

>>8846975
The proponents of climate-change policy (surprisingly) do nothing to lessen their environmental impact. Why is that? Almost as if virtue-signaling is more important than making personal sacrifices.
>Acceptance of climate change is more important than practical, personal action against your environmental impact
Really activates my almonds

File: 1492861167236.jpg (108KB, 575x387px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 575x387px

>>8840683
Yes.

File: 1381136931155.gif (564KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 600x450px

Congrats, march for science, you managed to further politicize objective reasoning and experimentation and only further alienate various "skeptics". They can now point at shit like
>>8840684
and claim global warming is a hoax made up by trannies or whatever.

this march is the definition of "YOU'RE NOT HELPING"

File: 20170422_111635.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

>mitondria
FUCKING NORMIES GET OF MY RALLY! REEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Yes.

Any sane person can see there will always be opportunistic people who will use it for their own political agenda, but this is about far greater than that.

Our admin has already ripped the structure for environmental protections, at the bare basic. It's frightening to see what else is willing to unfold in 4 years. They already defunded STEM jobs in the govt this week.

Stemfags against men in suits.

>>8840817

>The whole idea of science is that it is verifiable regardless of political, religious, or emotional perspective.

Agreed. What I cannot understand is how you cannot see that the people organizing and participating in that shit are using doing this to because they see science being refunded and want to take it under their ideological wing and use it for its own agenda. >>8840684 this blatant Shit here for instance.

>>8844830
T H O R I U M
H
O
R
I
U
M

>>8847616
>Just do nothing while taking it up the ass
>Don't resist because we will react harder
>Be better than the literalists who wanna rape the consitution by letting them go unchecked and not fight them on so many things because that might cause conflict!

Coward.

>>8847692
Meanwhile, in reality... NASA just got its budget bumped up to nearly $20 billion, Trump's administration is starting to make genuine legislative pushes for increased nuclear power utilization, and the majority of cuts made to agencies like the EPA and DoE have been cuts to defunct and redundant regulatory offices.

My research department just got a massive grant approved by Trump's admin. We're hiring new post-docs and techs, completely upgrading the lab facilities. All this nonsense about him defunding STEM jobs is horseshit. The ones who should be afraid are people working in regulatory agencies and bullshit soft-science fields.

>>8840684

Social justice: not even once

>tfw joined just to sprout the dumbest most retarded ideas associating them with the libtards while also enjoying the roleplay of moral superiority
>not even trying, just visiting goldmines like tumblr and reusing their dictionary is enough
Feel strangely good to be honest. No matter what nonsense you claim the opponent can't say anything because they are the bad guys and, well, they are the bad guys. Those around you agree and support too. I can almost understand why it's so attractive to many people.

>>8847751
this. the amount of white mans welfare going on in federal agencies is/was astounding. republicans have a better track record of science funding than dems by a good margin. this whole "drumpf is anti-science!" bullshit is just gaslighting by liberals who don't know what the fuck they are talking about.

>>8847751

So few pennies given to you by the orange clown is enough to close your eyes about how he's destroying the environment and whitewashing science?

Wow.

>>8847774
>he's destroying the environment and whitewashing science
[citation needed]

>>8847751

This

Psychology and sociology departments deserve to be defunded

>>8847782

>de facto closed EPA and gutted nasa's environmental work

>research money is being granted I give you that, for research useful to the military industrial complex

>talking about restating fucking NUKE production

File: 1492801650610.jpg (64KB, 772x501px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 772x501px

>>8847774
>whitewashing science

>>8847790
>He thinks military research spending does not benefit humanity at all

Fucking kys m8

You can't say you support science if you think that importing a bunch of third world, sub-80 IQ people into your nation will have a positive effect. And I guarantee most of these people "marching for science" believe it

WE NEED TO HAVE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HARD AND SOFT SCIENCE AND DISALLOW THE SOFT SCIENCES TO CALL THEMSELVES SCIENCE OR THEY WILL CONTINUE TO BRING US DOWN

>>8840875
Who is this image quoting?

>>8847790
>de facto closed EPA
no. he gutted their climate research and a bunch of other bullshit programs that don't actually fall in line with the EPA's mission statement. that being clean air, and clean water for the most part.

>nasa's environmental work
once again, thats not part of NASA's mission statement. climate research is the most notorious white mans welfare program in the last 20 years. every agency was trying to get a piece of that and it was detracting from the reason those agencies were created in the first place.

>restating fucking NUKE production
our nuclear stockpile is old. the weapons are falling into a state of disrepair and need to be replaced. we aren't going to be increasing warhead count. i know you live in a fantasy land where everyone gets along and sings cumbaya, but MAD and our nuclear force projection is one of the primary deterrents to other countries.

>>8840684
>immigration
>a scientific issue

>>8847790
>de facto closed EPA
The EPA still exists and still has considerable regulatory power. Most of what was shut down were defunct, ineffective, or redundant regulatory departments.

>gutted nasa's environmental work
Climate research falls within the purview of the NOAA, not NASA. However there are still dozens of NASA Earth Science missions that will remain active.

>research money is being granted I give you that, for research that is useful
Fixed that for you.

>talking about restating fucking NUKE production
Arms must be properly upgraded and maintained or they're not effective.

File: all of the day bro.png (99KB, 682x366px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 682x366px

>>8847790
>Restarting nuke production
Fucking finally holy goddamn that's overdue.

File: SAM_1059.jpg (1MB, 2720x2040px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2720x2040px

>>8847862
i actually got an offer to go help out with that. the guys who interviewed me had that million yard Roy Batty stare to them and it weirded me out.

>>8847862
who /floppydisk/ here?

File: scren.png (58KB, 693x453px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 693x453px

>>8840683
>scientists organize a march for science months ago, to protest Trump's le ebil view on science
>1000s of gender studies undergrads ask to help
>all the SJWs start using the march to spout their marxist propaganda
>all the reputable names in science drop out of the march

like pottery

>>8847873
Apparently anything to do with nuclear anything in the military is a soul crushing tedious job that pays too well not to turn down.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (72KB, 522x476px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 522x476px

>>8847881
>that pays too well not to turn down.

its the only reason i showed up to the interview. i like money, but that soul crushing vibe was so intense i could feel it on my face. the oldest guy there reeked of cigarettes and looked like he could play the grim reaper in some HBO series.

I don't really enough about science to form a logical opinion on the matter, so I'll refrain from stating my opinion as "fact." I do have a few questions about the movement though:
How many of these marchers are actual scientists, and of those, what fields are most of these scientists in?
How many of these marchers are against GMO's, nuclear energy, and vaccines?

>>8840683
sure

>>8840683
I m a left leaning person , but for god sake keep the identity politics out of science

>>8847881
>never go nuke
They usually lure smart high school kids in with a 100k signing bonus and tell them what cool nuclear jobs they will be doing.

They then spend the next 2 years in what is basically military cram school and if they don't kill themselves they get shipped off to a cramped submarine where they will spend the next 6 years staring at dials and being hated by the entire crew because they got a 100k sign up bonus, all the while wishing they killed themselves in nuke school.

>>8847821

Anything that cannot be empirically proven should not be called science.

Psychology and sociology should not be considered science at all. The more scientific aspects of psychology (brain scans) should just be classified as biology.

>>8847572
Look at what they've done to social "science" departments, the vidya industry, otherwise acceptable newspapers.

These people act like locusts.

>>8840683
Where was the March for Science when Obama crippled NASA with his budget cuts?

>>8847748
See, you just politicized it again
If you want to fight on policy, go for it, more power to you
but if you want to push policy and science in general at the same time, please don't

File: 1271208837593.png (3KB, 210x221px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 210x221px

>>8847879
see this is the fucking problem, you'renothelping.jpg

just get tyson and nye on TV more. i know /sci/ hates them but they promote basic science literacy and basic critical thinking and even a little bit helps a lot.

>>8847936
Empirical observation is still science. Unproven theories backed by empirical observation can be science, as long as they are accepted as unproven theories. Would you disagree?

>>8847904
>How many of these marchers are actual scientists, and of those, what fields are most of these scientists in?
Likely next to none, I'd guess less than 1% of the marchers are actual scientists

>How many of these marchers are against GMO's, nuclear energy, and vaccines?
Depends on the issue. I'd guess most are at least smart enough to be for vaccines. But it's like 50/50 on GMOs and nuclear.

>>8842127
this is a true statement

>>8847904
>How many of these marchers are actual scientists, and of those, what fields are most of these scientists in?
Basically none.

Half the legit researchers they had planned to speak dropped out when the SJW/identity politics crowd latched onto the march like a fucking lamprey. Based on the event list it looked like most of the ones who stuck around were either bio, soc, or pop-sci

>>8840683
I do.

>>8848364
>I'd guess most are at least smart enough to be for vaccines.

level 5 vegans are notoriously anti vaxxers

While I worry about the marchers resting on their laurels instead of pushing harder afterward, and think that something more forceful might be needed, I do think it's at least a start, and better than just sitting around saying "Protesting isn't going to do anything/is stupid" and then not coming up with a better idea and executing it.

>one would've been enough etc etc etc

File: Bill stahp.png (1MB, 1117x601px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1117x601px

>>8848349
>Bill Nye
Nope, he's gone off the deep end.

File: Incarceration-holding-IQ-constant.png (31KB, 390x363px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 390x363px

>>8847572
>>8847610
Is this the equality people want?

File: Portrait.png (550KB, 480x800px) Image search: [Google]

550KB, 480x800px

I agreed with Black Lives Matter until I found out it was the anti-Occupy based on Helene's not funny joke about how black lives don't matter to her at all and she uses her position of power to destroy them and make them miserable randomly and with malice, so I expect March for Science will be more of the same. If they were going to do something positive I'd assume they would call it March for Violence.

I will destroy them with violence.

File: Dumbocrats.jpg (38KB, 575x591px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 575x591px

>>8847748
>the literalists who wanna rape the consitution
This was the chairman of your political party at one point in the time. The "literalists" you speak of who want to reserve our liberties are hardly the ones who pose a real threat to the Constitution.

>>8841979
I still don't understand the difference between fascism and autocracy.

>>8840683
I am fine with protesting shit like cutting funds from the EPA but the fact that they added all this >>8840684 political horseshit makes me anti-march

>>8850056
Facism is for the state and all its values while autocracy is for the ruler and all his values

As an example Hitler wanted Lebensraum while the Habsburgs wanted to keep their mutlinational state together under THEM through any cost, as shown by the Dual Monarchy and Franz's plan to expand the Dual Monarchy idea.

>>8840875
You must have <100 IQ to post here kid.

>>8840684
While the poster technically has a point, the answer that science will produce on those matters will be very far from what they want to hear.

>>8850119
><><

File: march for science.jpg (254KB, 1004x1200px) Image search: [Google]

254KB, 1004x1200px

hahahahaHAHAHAHA
i REALLY hope none of you went to this lmao

>>8850952
That thing ate a scientist from the future?

File: tyrone laugh.gif (3MB, 264x242px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 264x242px

>>8850957

>>8847565
>against scientific economic principles
What the fuck