It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: spiritualzombie
Nobody is going to convince the Trump fascists on these forums of anything... I only hope these Nazi's are eventually dealt with appropriately. Trump belongs at the end of a rope.
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: soficrow
Im not going to comment on the politics or the conspiracy. I will comment, however, on the state of science. I hope that I am recognized as someone who respects the scientific method and common standards of logic (even if i fail from time to time). So I say this with concern and compassion:
What we call "science" has become a bastardized stepchild of science and monetization. There is growing concern over the validity of what we call "accepted science". Sometimes on the most fundamental levels.
Wouldn't that make Public (government funded) research all the more vital in the face of privately funded science tainted by corporate interests?
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: soficrow
Im not going to comment on the politics or the conspiracy. I will comment, however, on the state of science. I hope that I am recognized as someone who respects the scientific method and common standards of logic (even if i fail from time to time). So I say this with concern and compassion:
What we call "science" has become a bastardized stepchild of science and monetization. There is growing concern over the validity of what we call "accepted science". Sometimes on the most fundamental levels.
Wouldn't that make Public (government funded) research all the more vital in the face of privately funded science tainted by corporate interests?
If government wasn't the lapdog of the corporate world, perhaps.
But when i look at the wolves on Wall Street on one side, and the jackals in DC on the other, im not feeling that The People have any allies that won't lie to and manipulate them incessantly.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: soficrow
Im not going to comment on the politics or the conspiracy. I will comment, however, on the state of science. I hope that I am recognized as someone who respects the scientific method and common standards of logic (even if i fail from time to time). So I say this with concern and compassion:
What we call "science" has become a bastardized stepchild of science and monetization. There is growing concern over the validity of what we call "accepted science". Sometimes on the most fundamental levels.
Wouldn't that make Public (government funded) research all the more vital in the face of privately funded science tainted by corporate interests?
If government wasn't the lapdog of the corporate world, perhaps.
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: soficrow
Im not going to comment on the politics or the conspiracy. I will comment, however, on the state of science. I hope that I am recognized as someone who respects the scientific method and common standards of logic (even if i fail from time to time). So I say this with concern and compassion:
What we call "science" has become a bastardized stepchild of science and monetization. There is growing concern over the validity of what we call "accepted science". Sometimes on the most fundamental levels.
Wouldn't that make Public (government funded) research all the more vital in the face of privately funded science tainted by corporate interests?
If government wasn't the lapdog of the corporate world, perhaps.
Public researchers are not lobbyists...they are not elected, they don't look for campaign donations.
Conflating Politicians with publicly funded scientists is utter BS...for lack of a better adjective.
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: soficrow
Im not going to comment on the politics or the conspiracy. I will comment, however, on the state of science. I hope that I am recognized as someone who respects the scientific method and common standards of logic (even if i fail from time to time). So I say this with concern and compassion:
What we call "science" has become a bastardized stepchild of science and monetization. There is growing concern over the validity of what we call "accepted science". Sometimes on the most fundamental levels.
Wouldn't that make Public (government funded) research all the more vital in the face of privately funded science tainted by corporate interests?
If government wasn't the lapdog of the corporate world, perhaps.
Public researchers are not lobbyists...they are not elected, they don't look for campaign donations.
Conflating Politicians with publicly funded scientists is utter BS...for lack of a better adjective.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: soficrow
Im not going to comment on the politics or the conspiracy. I will comment, however, on the state of science. I hope that I am recognized as someone who respects the scientific method and common standards of logic (even if i fail from time to time). So I say this with concern and compassion:
What we call "science" has become a bastardized stepchild of science and monetization. There is growing concern over the validity of what we call "accepted science". Sometimes on the most fundamental levels.
Wouldn't that make Public (government funded) research all the more vital in the face of privately funded science tainted by corporate interests?
If government wasn't the lapdog of the corporate world, perhaps.
Public researchers are not lobbyists...they are not elected, they don't look for campaign donations.
Conflating Politicians with publicly funded scientists is utter BS...for lack of a better adjective.
So then tell me....who pays for those researchers?
How often is research funded by financially interested parties taken at face value?
Don't take my word for it.....just Google it. "Conflict of interest research science". Its known about, and efforts are being made to reduce its effect. We can't continue letting the tobacco companies be the only ones interested in paying for tobacco research. It kills people.
originally posted by: Teikiatsu
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: soficrow
Im not going to comment on the politics or the conspiracy. I will comment, however, on the state of science. I hope that I am recognized as someone who respects the scientific method and common standards of logic (even if i fail from time to time). So I say this with concern and compassion:
What we call "science" has become a bastardized stepchild of science and monetization. There is growing concern over the validity of what we call "accepted science". Sometimes on the most fundamental levels.
Wouldn't that make Public (government funded) research all the more vital in the face of privately funded science tainted by corporate interests?
In my experience government-funded research should be taken with a grain of salt for hidden agendas. Or flat-out waste and politician's pet projects.
originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
Publicly Funded Research is where gov decides unbiased answers are important for the public.
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: soficrow
Im not going to comment on the politics or the conspiracy. I will comment, however, on the state of science. I hope that I am recognized as someone who respects the scientific method and common standards of logic (even if i fail from time to time). So I say this with concern and compassion:
What we call "science" has become a bastardized stepchild of science and monetization. There is growing concern over the validity of what we call "accepted science". Sometimes on the most fundamental levels.
Wouldn't that make Public (government funded) research all the more vital in the face of privately funded science tainted by corporate interests?
If government wasn't the lapdog of the corporate world, perhaps.
Public researchers are not lobbyists...they are not elected, they don't look for campaign donations.
Conflating Politicians with publicly funded scientists is utter BS...for lack of a better adjective.
No they look for Govt. funding.
Public funding raises the risk of a loss of objectivity.
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: UKTruth
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: soficrow
Im not going to comment on the politics or the conspiracy. I will comment, however, on the state of science. I hope that I am recognized as someone who respects the scientific method and common standards of logic (even if i fail from time to time). So I say this with concern and compassion:
What we call "science" has become a bastardized stepchild of science and monetization. There is growing concern over the validity of what we call "accepted science". Sometimes on the most fundamental levels.
Wouldn't that make Public (government funded) research all the more vital in the face of privately funded science tainted by corporate interests?
If government wasn't the lapdog of the corporate world, perhaps.
Public researchers are not lobbyists...they are not elected, they don't look for campaign donations.
Conflating Politicians with publicly funded scientists is utter BS...for lack of a better adjective.
No they look for Govt. funding.
Sometimes and sometimes the gov looks for them.
Either way they get paid regardless of conclusions.
Public funding raises the risk of a loss of objectivity.
That makes no sense.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan
Publicly Funded Research is where gov decides unbiased answers are important for the public.
Is that what you believe?
And who do Lobbyists work over in dark corners?
Sure, maybe some of it is unbiased. But that is only the stuff like investigating the impact of arguing on marital sex rates or something inane. That's not a study that anyone would care to censor.
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Indigo5
If i get time this evening Ill try to dig up something to help elucidate.
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Indigo5
If i get time this evening Ill try to dig up something to help elucidate.
"Elucidate"...illuminate, shed light on..
Papers that contain any measure of "confirmation bias" can be examined to "Elucidate" the bias..
Papers and results that are subject to "Black-Out" can not...
And how the hell you managed to say this with a straight face boggles the mind..
"Trumps blackout on science results has as much to do with getting a handle on propaganda"
The man champions Alex Jones!! ...holy #...There is nothing "Illuminating" about a black-out and that is the point.
We are not even afforded the chance to scrutinize research for veracity? WHY...cuz facts are counterproductive to his message.
Good to see you proudly wed to these tactics...I will make note not to confuse you for an honest broker in the exchange of ideas.
YA...Blackout of research!!...Transparency? It's only for liberals!!
Reminds of this new Poll..And no..its not the Onion..
Poll: Trump voters OK with a private email server
thehill.com...
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: Teikiatsu
originally posted by: Indigo5
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: soficrow
Im not going to comment on the politics or the conspiracy. I will comment, however, on the state of science. I hope that I am recognized as someone who respects the scientific method and common standards of logic (even if i fail from time to time). So I say this with concern and compassion:
What we call "science" has become a bastardized stepchild of science and monetization. There is growing concern over the validity of what we call "accepted science". Sometimes on the most fundamental levels.
Wouldn't that make Public (government funded) research all the more vital in the face of privately funded science tainted by corporate interests?
In my experience government-funded research should be taken with a grain of salt for hidden agendas. Or flat-out waste and politician's pet projects.
Yes...A singular grain of salt...Mostly around WHAT question was posed, not the results.
Whilst Privately funded research is being paid to give an answer..If they give the right answer...they get more work...give the wrong answer...and the study might not be published or the work shut down..
originally posted by: soficrow
a reply to: Blaine91555
It's just an attempt to get the flow of information under control by routing it through a review process, so they know what is going out to the public under the auspices of the government. It's not an attempt to silence science.
You must be under 30.
I fondly remember my own youthful naivete.
Sweet.
originally posted by: Byrd
originally posted by: soficrow
Scientists need to talk about their work with their peers, and the public has a right to access research funded by tax money.
America isn't the world. Other nations will take up the research and move forward (as our American labs, underfunded, deal with few employees and antiquated equipment) ... and in the end, America will pay much more for new things (like better batteries) than if we used our own scientists to develop these ideas and market them to the world.
And yeah, I know about underfunded labs. Our paleontology lab is pretty underfunded... only recently got a good air system for the scribes but today the head of the lab was going back to argue for a few hundred dollars to buy another airscribe (some of ours are 15-20 years old.)
So we lose our advantage. I'd rather us be the leader in technology than the total consumer that never has any new innovations to sell.