AN ASSAULT ON SCIENCE

@Setanta,

Quote:

Wanna buy a bridge?

Naw, I aint here to buy. I'm sellin Bibles. CHEAP! Gitcho copy of "An Inconvenient Truth" right here. Only $99.99 (plus S & H, of course, but it's only $39.99). Money is no object when salvation is at hand.

0 Replies

@layman,

layman wrote:

I'll simply repeat what I first said about all this:

Hmm...

I'm still just not getting it. Maybe try again in a week and hope my mind is more receptive?

0 Replies

@Ragman,

Ragman wrote:

The classic assault on science was when back in 2001 Dubya severely curtailed stem-cell research in USA.

" ... limited the number of embryonic stem cell lines that could be used for research.(While he claimed that 78 lines would qualify for federal funding, only 19 lines were actually available."

IMHO, that was a deplorable misuse of executive power. His misguided fundamentalist leanings caused a loss of research progress in medical research for our country. that may have contributed to a loss of lives.

Do you think that President Bush was motivated by negative feelings about science?

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Buy this, eh?

Quote:

Remember that wonderful picture of stranded polar bears on an ice floe that were used by folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore to demonstrate how dire the man-made global warming issue is? ...the picture was taken in August, when every year the fringes of the Arctic ice cap melt...

The photographer, Australian marine biology student Amanda Byrd, didn’t think the bears were in any jeopardy:...You have to keep in mind that the bears are not in danger at all...you have the impression they are in the middle of the ocean and they are going to die…But they were not that far from the coast, and it was possible for them to swim.

http://deadlinelive.info/2011/07/28/arctic-scientist-under-investigation-for-polar-bear-claims/

0 Replies

@layman,

layman's source wrote:

So where does this now omnipresent notion come from that polar bears—famously strong swimmers—will perish in droves under the warming waves as the distance between the ice edge and the shore becomes too great to overcome? Let’s have a look-see.

Okay, forget about whether you believe anthropogenic global warming is a thing or not, and just look at the reasoning here...

The writer here is reasoning that even if the icy ground under polar bears' feet vanishes, they'll be fine, because they know how to swim. Because of course, being able to swim means you can live your entire life, 24/7, in the water.

1 Reply

@Kolyo,

Quote:

The writer here is reasoning that even if the icy ground under polar bears' feet vanishes, they'll be fine, because they know how to swim. Because of course, being able to swim means you can live your entire life, 24/7, in the water.

Heh. How in the hell did you come up with THAT?

The issue was about misrepresentation and fraud. Did ya catch that part?

1 Reply

@layman,

I caught that polar bears being strong swimmers is significant to the question of whether they can survive if the very ground under their feet vanishes.

(After that I more or less stopped reading.)

0 Replies

It's absolutely hilarious that lameman thinks Al Gore is significant in the question of whether or not the climate is warming. I may not be able to sell him a bridge, but it looks to me as though he's already bought the farm.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Quote:

thinks Al Gore is significant in the question of whether or not the climate is warming

Is this thread about global warmin? I thought is was about an assault on science, eh? Who knew?

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Didn't Gore when an award for his "Inconvenient Truth"? It seems almost all of those wonderful predictions have failed to come true...

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

This thread is not about global warming, or Al Gore, or lameman's delusions. Al Gore is, apparently, lameman's boogyman. Gore's book was written a decade ago. Climate scientists don't and never have based their assessments of Gore's book. If right-wing lunatic fringe types want to fulminate about Gore, as though he matters, that's no skin off my nose.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

The left pushes psuedo-science as much as the political right.

If not more so see it beginning with the club of Roman project in the 1970s

0 Replies

@Tes yeux noirs,

Quote:

Creationists are widely regarded as nuts.

That for the most part is true in the US also.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

Good science doesn't have a political or religious objective.

Science does not have such a bias but people such the hell does so looking at who is making a claim is worth doing.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

I can't imagine why someone would bring up Al Gore--this thread is about science and scientists, and i believe i am correct in saying that Gore is not a scientist. Would anyone bring him up for partisan, polemical reasons? Heaven forfend!

I, for one, would be happy to bring up Al Gore in the context of this thread. After all, the thread is about "an assault on science", and Al Gore is doing an exemplary job of pushing back against this assault. I'm thinking, in particular, about his 2007 book, The Assault on Reason. Whether Gore lives in a big house or not, his stance on how science should affect public policy seems eminently sound to me. I wish we had more politicians like him.

0 Replies

You better watch out, them rightwingnuts'll git ya.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Good science doesn't have a political or religious objective.

Do you mean to imply that the Manhattan Project wasn't good physics? Building the Colossus computer to break the Enigma code wasn't good informatics and electrical engineering? The Lewis and Clark expedition didn't produce good geographical research? All these projects had pretty clear political objectives.

1 Reply

@layman,

I worked in the medical field from the day I turned sixteen (taking minifilm xrays after school and on the weekend, more in summer), was a science major (bacteriology) at a sharp school, and was a research person (hematology, rheumatology, immunology) for a large block of years. Those were, to start, in the beginning years that women rarely got to get into med school. I've spoken with dozens of medical scientists, at least a hundred with well regarded work. I know none who thought the way your quoted person felt.

Yes, there is juggling for recognition, for attribution, for gaining on others' experiments, a kind of pleasure in rivalry.

I never saw Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. Cripes.

I don't take slime-oes as rampant, whatever my thoughts re the directions medicine takes.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

I remember when scientists were repulsed by lying, and successfully resisted practicing it.

Ya, them days are gone.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

I don't know, as I don't follow all that now.
Money has made its way, but I'm not sure actual medicine is occluded. I see the canopy of "providers" as I even did back in the 70's. I'm usually interested in this subject.

Lots of people wanted to be doctors, including years ago, for a snappy career.
I don't know stats on all that versus now, as it would involve a lot of interviews.

I wanted to get to be a doctor in the early sixties. I was right that schools were closed to women. I was wrong re myself. which I didn't get until later on, re what I wanted.

1 Reply

AN ASSAULT ON SCIENCE

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know