- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The fact that we have to have a "March for Science" is frightening
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:40 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:40 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
It's not anti science to question those outcomes.
one may say that questioning current scientific standards and results is....science
2
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:41 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
and Scruffy is a doctor and also a man of science in terms of education and profession
but, OP, a journalist or other media member, is in a position to lecture Scruffy on science
And you're a lawyer. Why are you here?
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:42 pm to Superior Pariah
quote:
And you're a lawyer. Why are you here?
i like using my person-sized magnifying glass on ants
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:42 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
one may say that questioning current scientific standards and results is....science
I've always thought it was part of the process
This post was edited on 4/22/17 at 2:43 pm
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:44 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
It's not anti science to question those outcomes. There's nothing sacred about science.
Correct, except when someone claims science is wrong with nothing more than a "well I see it differently". When someone questions science with nothing more than an opinion, that person just comes off as ignorant.
It IS anti-science when you disagree with it on those grounds.
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:45 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
I've always thought it was part of the process
it is
like i said above, a big ideological and communicative issue in this discussion is process v. results
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:46 pm to TitleistProV1X
A lot of people in this thread are focusing on the fact science has been politicized. That is definitely the basis for the current situation, but the reason for the march is $$. These people are scared of losing jobs and funding. Therefore, they label anyone against them a Neanderthal, religious zealot, or ignorant redneck.
The great thing about science is that it is fact based. Science also has a lot of theory and data that can be biased and manipulated. The marchers want to hide behind the facade their work is nobel and true, but in reality they are using tax dollars to spread their bullshite.
The great thing about science is that it is fact based. Science also has a lot of theory and data that can be biased and manipulated. The marchers want to hide behind the facade their work is nobel and true, but in reality they are using tax dollars to spread their bullshite.
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:46 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i like using my person-sized magnifying glass on ants
Ah yes, the beacon of reason among a field of peasants. You always were the Renaissance Man of the OT.
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:48 pm to Cowboyfan89
quote:
IS anti-science when you disagree with it on those grounds.
Sure. If you disagree just because you dislike the predicted outcome or the process them I agree.
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:48 pm to Cowboyfan89
quote:
except when someone claims science is wrong with nothing more than a "well I see it differently".
but the issue is that this behavior is seen as only being applicable to one side (conservatives). this EXACT behavior is pervasive with liberals in science
example: "soft" science experts (anthropology, sociology, women's studies) attacking "hard" science results (in things like biology, specifically evolutionary studies). things like evolutionary sex traits being attacked with "well i see it differently" by women's studies feminists
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:50 pm to Cowboyfan89
quote:
except when someone claims science is wrong with nothing more than a "well I see it differently".
another example
OP dismissing an article with verified data because he didn't like a word used
Posted on 4/22/17 at 2:52 pm to Ghost of Colby
quote:
but the reason for the march is $$. These people are scared of losing jobs and funding.
and this is where it REALLY gets political
if one biased group can marginalize the studies of another group, they get more federal money flowing (which means the others get less federal money, further marginalizing their studies). that process is pervasive across all scientific fields
the groups in power also use their power of review to prevent publication of results they don't like, again, which skews the money train in their favor and creates an artificial facade of how pervasive and mainstream their biased results are seen.
Posted on 4/22/17 at 3:31 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
OP dismissing an article with verified data because he didn't like a word used
Big difference between dismissing an article, even with some scientific data presented (does he cite his sources), and dismissing a scientific study that has been peer reviewed?
Was the article in City-Journal peer reviewed? I saw one real link to a journal article. The rest were quotes from books or book authors.
Not that I disagree with anything that was said in the article, just playing devil's advocate here. There is hardly a parallel between dismissing an article in popular press and one in a reputable scientific journal. While a fine author and journalist, John Tierney is no scientist.
Posted on 4/22/17 at 3:32 pm to Cowboyfan89
quote:
There is hardly a parallel between dismissing an article in popular press and one in a reputable scientific journal.
sure
but he did it b/c they used a word he didn't like
Posted on 4/22/17 at 3:47 pm to hendersonshands
quote:
I'm pretty liberal about social issues, but when you start to tell me that your gender can change daily, I think you have some sort of personality disorder or some chemical imbalance.
The same here. I don't understand why gays and lesbians have accepted trangenders. And I'm even more surprised by how so many Black women seem to support the whole gay, lesbian, transgender side of things. Maybe they just feel strength in their numbers when they combine.
They may all feel alienated or disrespected, but the ones that have legitimate gripes lose credibility through these associations.
Posted on 4/22/17 at 3:49 pm to chinese58
quote:
The same here. I don't understand why gays and lesbians have accepted trangenders
It's a new thing, the used to be at odds. It's more about political clout
Posted on 4/22/17 at 4:00 pm to SlowFlowPro
OP will ignore that tweet and continue to build a house of straw
Posted on 4/22/17 at 4:04 pm to chinese58
quote:
don't understand why gays and lesbians have accepted trangenders
Spot on. I can't comprehend out any self-respecting gay man would want to lump his lot in with these mentally ill freaks. Are you telling me that just because The man has certain proclivities means he has to be all gung ho about some nutso Who wants to chop Mr. Winkie off and pretend he's a girl.
Do you want to tell me that this guy
Is the same as this thing?
I have no quarry with the queens but this tranny, non-binary hooplah is a bridge too far.
Posted on 4/22/17 at 4:34 pm to fr33manator
Posted on 4/22/17 at 6:07 pm to Superior Pariah
quote:
The fact that we have to have a "March for Science" is frightening
We don't, it's a strawman
Page 7 of 8
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News