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.

 

Scientists planning massive march in DC

page: 12
107
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jaellma
Ok, folks, this is actually heating up and will be huge. After the huge turnout from the Women's march, which attracted north of 1 million marchers, scientists are now planning their own march on DC.

As a degreed engineer myself, I will definitely be in this march, come hell or high water. The new government is going overboard with their antics, funds are being slashed, important topics are being deleted from their websites. These things must not be tolerated.



Plans for the march comes after President Donald Trump’s administration deleted climate change references from the White House website (Trump has previously said global warming is a hoax.) His transition team for the Environmental Protection Agency are reportedly planning massive cuts at the agency and ending funding for scientific research. His administration also recently barred the Environmental Protection Agency from posting social media updates and speaking to the press.

“Slashing funding and restricting scientists from communicating their findings (from tax-funded research!) with the public is absurd and cannot be allowed to stand as policy,” said organizers in a post on Jan. 21. “An American government that ignores science to pursue ideological agendas endangers the world.”


Scientists and activists planning march in DC


I remember the government certified and approved science that said smoking was not harmful; fluoride is approved and pumped community wide; glyphosate contamination, electromagnetic pollution and hormone simulator contamination .... government science is always suspect ...... including AGW .....

I could imagine scientists would try to preserve the mile and a half tall glaciers sitting on New York City 20,000 years ago ..... if they existed today ....

All their data should be checked by independent sources .... including me and you however we know that the EPA, NOAA and NASA all hide much of their data adjusted sources

I guess some science is more "scientific" than others .....




posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 12:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: FamCore
a reply to: Jaellma

Are Bill Nye and NIel DeGrasse going to this shindig?



Neil: why dont you pick on a mind your own size... own size..
We got a bad azz over here plus i got your back Nye..
Astrophisics black guy... hayden planetary fly...
by the way the answer to your little question is "I" as in I put the swag back in science while isacc newton was lying and sticking daggers in liebenz. and hiding was up inside his attic on some harry potter business..
the universe is infinite but this battle is finished.


This is incredible, if I was a Mod I would give applause lol First ATS comment/interaction I've had this morning. Thank you again
amazing yuppa



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 12:20 PM
link   
I wish I could go to this.

What more damning an accusation could the be than scientists - by definition people who seek truth by correlating themselves to the particular subject of their study - coming together to march against Trump??

Beautiful. Women, Science....lol....isn't this saying something about the 'brand' of machismo that Trump peddles?



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: MisterSpock

This has nothing to do with party-politics.

It's cause and effect and the denial of cause and effect. Science is a very sane practice. Scientists, for the most part, aspire to understand the world.

Climate change is happening. The dangers of nuclear war are very real - and the compounding of nuclear war on climate change is even more frightening.

Then you have other facts of development, society etc, being completely denied - from Education, to the Environment, to Energy.

Trump is INSANE, and so the diagnosis that he 'endangers the world' is very real.

Your need to associate political party into this conversation is nothing more than "splitting" i.e. the psychoanaytical fact that people stuck in a 'good vs. evil' paradigm, superficially slotted as "democrats" vs. "republicans", or "liberals vs. conservatives", is gainsaid i.e. contradicted, by the fact that many people walking in the science march are affirming reason - that is, the need to recognize cause and effect, and the incredible evil, selfishness, and perversity of not caring about the effect we are having on our planet.

I don't know where you live, but the weather is truly cockamamie in Toronto. Foggy nights with 5 degree celsius weather in January - usually the coldest time of the year - for a full week, is absurd.

The explanation being given for this weather behavior, or in a larger scale, "climate change", is the INPUT of Human industrial activity, i.e. extraction of fossil fuels, burning of said fuels, and the released co2 into the atmosphere; the methane from burps of industrial cattle-farming; the cutting down of massive swathes of forests. All of this very much makes sense - and is being reasonably correlated with the changes in climate.

Only insane people ignore their insane behavior without care or concern for the fate of future people.

Only insane people think the world was made for them - for their individual self.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 12:39 PM
link   
a reply to: FamCore

well its from Epic rap battles of history. Sir issacc newton vs bill nye. I suggest watching it.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: fnpmitchreturns




All their data should be checked by independent sources .... including me and you however we know that the EPA, NOAA and NASA all hide much of their data adjusted sources


What on earth are you on?

Neither you nor I are ABLE to confirm or deny the research of EXPERTS i.e. we do not have the requisite KNOWLEDGE to even comment on their work.

Do you even understand the insanity of what you just said? Do you know how knowledge acquisition and the transformation of mind that accompanies it, works? Expertise excludes - as philosophers since Plato have long understood.

You should not - and if I were president, I would make it ILLEGAL, to make false claims - and spreading noxious propaganda - like the one you just made that imperiously and arrogantly imagines that either you or I can understand the nitty-gritty of climate sciences.

Scientists from all relevant fields - climate science, geophysics, meteorology, biophysics - are overwhelming is agreement - not out of a conspiracy - but fact. Only people who conspire and paranoid (mentally ill) people think climate change is fake - and it makes sense they would think that: they think other people operate just as they do.

Fortunately, a thing called reason exists, allowing sane people to understand the logic underlying climate science, and also allowing people who are unreasonably paranoid to recognize their paranoia - and so realize that they are projecting their own anxieties upon this issue.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Jaellma

Anything to cut back on the amount of gaw damn
drug commercials. You know the kind that offer
major health implications or death. And tell you
ask your doctor if medical advice from a TV
commercial is right for you? If this has any effect
at all. Science is just way at of hand anyway
in my opinion. Transhumanism to transgender
it could use a good brake job if you ask me.
Consider our spirit a little more because man
does not live by bread alone.

edit on Rpm12817v02201700000014 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: fnpmitchreturns


All their data should be checked by independent sources .... including me and you however we know that the EPA, NOAA and NASA all hide much of their data adjusted sources

I guess some science is more "scientific" than others .....


The gerenal popualtion are barely scientfically litterate, don't nearly half the US believe in creationsim?

Unless you hold multiple PHds in the Sciences and can so partial differentiation in your sleep, you're in no way qualified to review a paper or understand what it even means, which is the case for 99.9% of the population. This why papers are peer-reviewedby experts on the subjects.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
North of a million free abortion marchers in DC?

Hahahaha

I thought scientists valued facts and evidence.


I've been seeing that stated over and again including in the MSM, but that was the total number of all the marches across the country, not just in DC.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 02:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Justoneman
The truth as Phage might agree is often somewhere in the middle of these two sides .



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Astrocyte


Scientists from all relevant fields - climate science, geophysics, meteorology, biophysics - are overwhelming is agreement - not out of a conspiracy - but fact. Only people who conspire and paranoid (mentally ill) people think climate change is fake - and it makes sense they would think that: they think other people operate just as they do.

Can you provide a source to this information?



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: Teikiatsu

I doubt your credentials as a scientist.

While I am not a scientist myself, I have cause to employ them. What field of research are you in? Hypotheticaly..


Doubt what you want. My degrees in Biology and Microbiology combined with 15 years in vaccine production and bioinformatics are what matters.

In the end, this is the internet and all we are is what we write for others to see. You aren't the first to think you have some means to judge my credentials, you certainly won't be the last.


Are you a mfg or process engineer for a pharmaceutical co? Or do you have PhD plus Post-Doc research. Do you spend time in the lab or time in production? Or bridging between the two, scaling vaccine production? I assume your BS was in Biology and MS in Micro-Biology.

Curious as to how you define scientist when you declare yourself one. I define Scientist as basically non-iterative, novel research. They don't optimize, they seek to answer questions that haven't been sufficiently answered before.



No matter what I say, you will continue to doubt and seek some weak point. Suffice it to say I am high-tier management of the quality unit that oversees stability and efficacy of product that is both registered as well as in pre-marketing trials. I advise R&D and Manufacturing on what tests are required for release, what antigen yield ranges to expect, what is and is not safe for animals, and when regulations say "No, you cannot do that."

A scientist is anyone who sees a problem and applies a methodical approach to distill down to the truth, whether they like the answer or not, and are able to push aside their own biases and admit their initial theory needs rework. The people you describe are represented by my R&D group, but the people I deal with are not usually willing to drop the avenue they have convinced themselves is correct. It takes a lot of debate and overcoming of ego. Your image of scientists is better suited to TV/movies/hollywood.
edit on 28-1-2017 by Teikiatsu because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: bastion


Unless you hold multiple PHds in the Sciences and can so partial differentiation in your sleep, you're in no way qualified to review a paper or understand what it even means, which is the case for 99.9% of the population. This why papers are peer-reviewedby experts on the subjects.

Says you.
What are your qualifications that allow you to make this statement?
edit on 28-1-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Teikiatsu

It sounds like you work with pretty bad scientists.

The research scientists I regularly recruit and employ are deeply educated in their fields and solve novel problems from First Principles thinking.

It would be a mistake to assume that all researchers and scientists are similar to your small group of colleagues. Good science does not make conclusions from tiny contaminated samples.
edit on 28-1-2017 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 04:35 PM
link   
I hope that guy with the cheese wheel shows up.


Now that would be entertainment.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Jaellma

Knock yourself out buddy. Climate change is a hoax. Soros just wont give up will he.


edit on 28-1-2017 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
Oh wow, scientists are going to go protest because the biggest spender on research is going to decide if some of the research money is being wasted. Oh my, just because there are many different research grants given for the same thing all the time and nobody is looking much at any of this research, the government decided to evaluate where the waste is. These grants are big and when you start looking at the research, you will find there are doing research on something they just did research on. There needs to be better oversight on these expenditures and there needs to be people evaluating this research. It seems all that work is being wasted, not many people look at it and try to combine the researches to evaluate what they mean.

I know this because I read research every day. I like it, but have noticed way too much repetition in the research. Yes, it is good to verify the research is right, but not twenty times. Sure scientists are not going to be happy, their way of life could be in jeopardy, they might have to go work in one of the new factories or at Wallymart greeting people.

Yes we need research, but we need oversight and we need broad form evaluation of the research to see alternative ways it can be applied.



*MIC DROP*



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 07:26 PM
link   
The faster the change, the harder the resistance.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Astrocyte
a reply to: fnpmitchreturns




All their data should be checked by independent sources .... including me and you however we know that the EPA, NOAA and NASA all hide much of their data adjusted sources


What on earth are you on?

Neither you nor I are ABLE to confirm or deny the research of EXPERTS i.e. we do not have the requisite KNOWLEDGE to even comment on their work.

Do you even understand the insanity of what you just said? Do you know how knowledge acquisition and the transformation of mind that accompanies it, works? Expertise excludes - as philosophers since Plato have long understood.

You should not - and if I were president, I would make it ILLEGAL, to make false claims - and spreading noxious propaganda - like the one you just made that imperiously and arrogantly imagines that either you or I can understand the nitty-gritty of climate sciences.

Scientists from all relevant fields - climate science, geophysics, meteorology, biophysics - are overwhelming is agreement - not out of a conspiracy - but fact. Only people who conspire and paranoid (mentally ill) people think climate change is fake - and it makes sense they would think that: they think other people operate just as they do.

Fortunately, a thing called reason exists, allowing sane people to understand the logic underlying climate science, and also allowing people who are unreasonably paranoid to recognize their paranoia - and so realize that they are projecting their own anxieties upon this issue.


See they changed the name from Global warming to climate change. WHich cannot be refuted. the climate is always changing. People are super stupid in groups when it comes to scientist. And the anxieties you mention cut the opposite way as well on global warming believers. Scientist are too arrogant for their own good these days.



posted on Jan, 28 2017 @ 10:51 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa




See they changed the name from Global warming to climate change.

False.

The fact is; global warming is not the same thing as climate change. Thing is, global warming causes climate changes.
edit on 1/28/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
107
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join