How many Republicans attended a March for Science today?

Bring the Lear jet around, I have to save the planet and I feel like sushi so lets save Japan first..

 

For the most part, i agree. Peer-review only means that the methodology is correct, and that the conclusions correspond to the evidence obtained. Which is quite a lot. But replication is still demanded. The Scientific Method is not perfect. But it has self-correcting mechanisms.

It's not just about publishing for the sake of publishing. In order for a paper to be significant it has to bring something new. Not just professors. Any thesis for a PhD has to contribute something new to the body of knowledge. That's the reason why scientists are constantly trying to prove other scientists wrong. And it's also the reason why some accusations I've seen about scientists being involved in some sort of "conspiracy" is absolutely ridiculous. There is nothing that advances a scientist's career more than proving another scientist wrong. That is what they strive for. Richard Feynman (greatest American physicist after Einstein) says that he would wake up every morning thinking "Who can I prove wrong today?"

 

Well.. You can declare that "Cow" is a fruit, for all anybody cares. But the fact is they were marching to keep the government from defunding scientific research. And there is plenty of evidence that they would like to defund it.

 

So, no one else studies science in the private world? Man, that would be news to those who work for pharmaceutical companies.

 

14,211. I counted them

 

Maybe I should point out that Thomas Edison, the inventor of the light bulb, was a freethinking liberal. Also, since the invention of the light bulb, left leaning scientists have developed LED devices that are considerably more efficient and longer lasting. Therefore, the answer to the attempt at a joke is that us left leaning liberals aren’t changing lightbulbs nearly as much as conservatives like to pretend we are. You see, we have all bought long lasting LED lighting and may never have to change another bulb for the rest of our lives.



There is a reason that all the centers of innovation, in the United States, are in liberal oases. Another interesting statistic I heard the other day is that of the top 10 educated districts in America, nine are heavily Democratic and the other will be this summer.

 

Too many words. The sign on the right says the same thing, but in a more concise way.

 

The idea being that if you give a very narrow rally a broad name, you can apply that broadly to judge those who do or do not attend. This is like saying that since few liberals attend Life rallies they they must they must not value human life.

 

You either responded to the wrong post, or you just threw in the first talking point you grabbed from an alt-right blog without bothering to make sure whether it would fit or not.

 

That's the number of level-headed Republicans? So now we know.

 

"liberal" at the time meaning what we now call "classical liberal", or "libertarian".

 

I don't dispute the fact that the left has managed to take control of our higher education system. That has indeed happened, to the detriment of the kids being brought up within the system. Those on the right have generally kept their mouths shut and kept their heads down. But that may be changing. I think many people on the right are starting to say enough is enough...

Oh, and in Thomas Edison's day, freethinking liberals still understood which bathroom they should use. Yet another case of enough is enough...

 

Much of what has made America such a leader in the world has been our technological edge, which is greatly fueled by the innovation that flows out of scientific research. Therefore, it should come as no surprise that half of scientists work for private companies doing the research and development that is necessary in order to bring new and innovative products to market. This scientific and engineering core only exists because we have had some of the best institutions of higher education.

 

Liberal in that he saw his role in life as to improve the human condition, which is at the core of liberalism, classical and modern alike.

Don't know exactly why libertarians have the need to pretend they have a connection to classical liberalism. Every single "libertarian" who has ascended to a political office, has exercised his power in a right wing (those at the top matter most) manner. Possibly it is the cognitive disconnect living in a cult causes. After all it is a little tough to talk of liberals in disparaging ways and then to read through history and see that it has always been the liberals among us who have been leading us into modernity, the future and beyond. Don't forget it was and is liberals who make it possible for us to have this conversation, having invented computers, the internet, and all that.

 

I don't get where the right is going with this. They have attacked Science for years, and now they attack education. I'm wondering if those who do this realize that even though, through empathy, it might be a way of getting votes from the uneducated population, it doesn't project a positive image among the rest.

And women understood that their place was in the kitchen and not in the classroom ... right?

 

Education is being examined because it is becoming increasingly apparent that progressive Marxists have been subverting the educational process to their own political ends.

 

It has never been the case that the left took control of the higher education system. Rather the situation is along the lines that those individuals who have the curiosity, and the drive, to become highly educated, tend to see the world from a scientific point of view, which is where liberalism came from.

Those on the right are always free to attend Christian colleges. There are easy to get in to - just don't expect a quality education.

 

Sounds more like what you'd like to believe than reality. After all how can all the scientists see what you clearly cannot allow yourself to see.

 

Arguendo of your perpetually warped, inept misuse of the word "liberal" (as has been pointed out), you weren't going to mention that the actual proliferation of electricity was 20% Edison and 80% Morgan the financier. Guess that was an oversight.

It's cute how you call capitalist corporations and their employees + capitalist financiers and their money + capitalist sophisticated capital markets + capitalist distribution channels + some scientists, "left leaning scientists" because without that whole equation, your "LED devices" may as well be farts up a lightning bug's ass. But I guess that was just an oversight too.

There are reasons that an arrogant, ignorant person would make an incorrect claim like "all the centers of innovation in the United States are in liberal oases"... those reasons would be mostly arrogance and ignorance.

Debunked dozens of times on this forum. There is no such thing as an "educated" city, state, district or whatever. There are places where people hold more degrees, and those places tend to be where there are a heavier concentration of very -average- minded folk who work as school teachers and bureaucrats... and who get lockstep pay increases the more paper of questionable worth that they have on their wall in any old thing from any old where. Most of those junk degree holders do in fact vote Democrat. Does that make them more educated? Of course not.

 

What is it exactly do you think I believe that isn't part of reality? What I said was that science was a method of observation and experiment. Do you disagree with that?

 

The reason is that, mainly, it takes excess resources to innovate, and fewer and fewer non-elites have that.

 

And what "pseudo science" is that?

 

I agree, that the article is a terrific example of how the "Leftist Climate Change" fanatics have attempted to use science for their agenda(s). When I read the article yesterday about the rally, I said to myself, "This is nothing more than anti-Trumpism." Donald J. Trump is not worse than any of the POTUS who preceded him. Mr. Trump is who Mr. Trump is and no one can alter or take that away from him. B=In all honesty, the Left has been using what they call science to promote behaviors that are basically unscientific. The basis of science is to study why laws exist and the benefit of those same laws, the mission of the Left has been to take behaviors, as I have stated earlier, those behaviors that turn the initial intent and purpose of laws and principles, such as human development and turn them upside down because in all reality, such people HATE science and initial intent, which is the basis of science to begin with (the why of the what and the how). In other words, why living beings react and exist in the manner in which they do, barring outside interference. As the article inferred, if only Francis Bacon, Madam Curie, [Benjamin Banneker and many others] were alive today, would they endorse or condemn the religion of Climatology?

 

Isn't that THE TRUTH about how education has been twisted! In my opinion, the problem began when government entered into the arena of using such things as education, public safety, public etiquette, etc., as a means of providing employment for the public because businesses globalized, packed up and physically left the country, leaving in their wake, massive unemployment so many in government willfully chose to use public employment as a means of pacification for the unemployed. This brought and brings public corruption, because those who have public employment surely are not going to allow their source(s) of income to be jeopardized.
Isn't government so lovely? Better yet, aren't people so lovely?

 

Marxist progressives don't specialize in the hard sciences--they grab power strongholds in the liberal arts and social sciences.