Scientists planning massive march in DC

originally posted by: RightInThere

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Political ideology was promoted through the veneer of science.

"Science is settled."
"Science is absolute."

Guess you never read the comment section in Nature or Science.

Lots of talk about things you know nothing about, sounds about right from a Republican.

Actually I'm an engineer.

originally posted by: RightInThere

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: Jaellma

I would think the violent alterations in the weather patterns we are experiencing in this country are more to do with fracking which changes the way that currents move through the crust than global warming. But not a cent will be spent on researching that, all evidence that shows a possible connection is old, they knew of a connection sixty years ago but I guess nobody wrote it in evidence that can be looked at. A little fracking is nothing, but we are fracking the hell out of whole areas. No money will be appropriated for looking at that though.

You really don't understand how science works do you?

If you think there's solid data showing fracking affects climate, collect the information, write a synopsis, and publish it in a journal.

That's all science is.

Scientists are people who go out and do field research, try to make sense of it, and then share it with their peers.

There is no magic. All it requires is logic and scrutinization.

Don't forget about the most important part......Money. It is hard to do scientific research on my social security checks.

I could go talk it over with the breakwall in marquette harbor, that is a peer.

Here are the currents I am talking about, they can have an influence on tracking of the way the clouds go. en.wikipedia.org...

Here is one I read a while back, I think this one actually talks about possible effects on the other energy fields. I don't have time to reread it, I red at least twenty articles on this before to arrive upon my conclusion. www.nap.edu...

originally posted by: rickymouse
Here are the currents I am talking about, they can have an influence on tracking of the way the clouds go. en.wikipedia.org...

Here is one I read a while back, I think this one actually talks about possible effects on the other energy fields. I don't have time to reread it, I red at least twenty articles on this before to arrive upon my conclusion. www.nap.edu...

I wasn't being factitious when I said if you really believe there's something to it that you should share your results with experts in the appropriate field(s). It's not too hard to dig up email addresses of geoscience researchers at various universities to converse with them to see if they can't offer a recommendation about whether the material is meaningful or if it's likely to lead to a dead end. Most scientists are incredibly open to honest discourse,.

Seriously, share what you have. You might find it more satisfying to talk with someone local to your own neck of the woods. Don't be confrontational, just put forward your argument and the data in the most concise and logical way possible. You might do the world some good.

So they are going to protest the day the ban is supposedly going to be lifted?

Doug Ericksen, the communications director for Trump’s transition team at EPA, said he expects the communications ban to be lifted by the end of this week.

“We’re just trying to get a handle on everything and make sure what goes out reflects the priorities of the new administration,” Ericksen said.

Beyond what was stated in the internal email, Ericksen clarified that the freeze on EPA contracts and grants won’t apply to pollution cleanup efforts or infrastructure construction activities. The agency later said it would also seek to complete that review by Friday.

fortune.com...

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: RightInThere

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Political ideology was promoted through the veneer of science.

"Science is settled."
"Science is absolute."

Guess you never read the comment section in Nature or Science.

Lots of talk about things you know nothing about, sounds about right from a Republican.

Actually I'm an engineer.

Are you sure you know the difference between an engineer and a technician?


When was the last time you read an article about climate change in Nature, Science, or any top tier journal.

Be specific - volume, issue, doi number, article - let's see how smart that old "engineer" brain of yours really is.

originally posted by: MisterSpock
This is going to be great.

Personally, I'm picturing a sea of white lab coats, more pocket protectors in one square mile than china manufactures in a year and plenty of discussion over who will be finally named the superior captain, Kirk or Picard.

Can't wait for people to call a crowd with 130 average IQ 'stupid protesters'.

a reply to: RightInThere

So in order to be an engineer, I have to cite climate change articles?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: RightInThere

So in order to be an engineer, I have to cite climate change articles?

Hey you brought up that you were an engineer, which was a complete non-sequitur to what I was saying. Thanks for proving my point. =)

So let me get this straight.
Now these "scientists" will be given grants according to their ability to do proper research rather than being part of the collective "group think"?

Sounds reasonable.
Keep cutting the fat Donny!

originally posted by: joemoe
"Climate Scientists" or Scientists? Big difference between the two.

Real scientists would come prepared. Taser-proof padded jumpsuits, self contained breathing gear, helmets, LRAD canceling headphones, and chemical concoctions that would make Molotov cocktails look like Bang Snaps.

Looking ahead to the next 4 years, maybe now is the time to start a business that has been in the back of my mind for years: Protestor Gear, Inc. Imagine a padded, waterproof jumpsuit decorated in an American flag theme. Matching helmet, visor, and external padding sold separately. DVR built into the helmet that sends audio and 360 video to a remote recorder.

If you're going to protest, do it in style, comfort, and safety.

originally posted by: JAY1980
So let me get this straight.
Now these "scientists" will be given grants according to their ability to do proper research rather than being part of the collective "group think"?

Sounds reasonable.
Keep cutting the fat Donny!

Oh yes.

This means that science (which is expensive) will now be funded by corporations and they can put the information behind paywalls.

* The only ones funding earthquake research will be the oil companies (we can trust them to tell the truth about fracking and we can trust them to tell us about Yellowstone)
* The only ones funding cancer research will be "Big Pharma" (currently, drug research is done in part with government grants and often without pharmacy company grants)
* The only ones funding PTSD research will be... well, nobody except companies that make money on drug treatments
* The only ones funding electronics research and development will be Japanese companies like Sony
* The only ones funding disability research will be insurance companies (I know, because one offered to buy MY research with the proviso that they owned the data and results and it couldn't be made public. I said "no.")
* The only ones funding violence research will be... nobody because you can't make money off that

etc, etc, etc.

We lobbied JSTOR to make journals and papers more available to the public. Rebels started the Academia.edu site where research is published and PLOS and other open source journals.

When the only way to have a research lab is to sell out to a corporation, then scientists have two options: move to a country where research is partly funded by the government and labs can have grants that pay for equipment and personnel and the results can be given out free - OR - sell out to a corporation.

At least scientists are protesting when they should and not eight years, too late, like women who are just now suddenly pretending to be outraged.

originally posted by: Jaellma

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.

Soooooo, what's next? Cutting grants on education, small business, transportation, etc just because there may be lack of oversight? Give me a break. So the government gets to be judge, jury and executioner in all matters concerning oversight on funding because of their ideologies?

What needs to happen is clear dialog on what stays and what goes. Cutting without deliberations is not smart and undermines years of hard work and also jeopardizes potential breakthrough is studies. Their actions so far don't appear to be logical or based on any given study we have seen.

Short answer is..Yes. Goverment if funding the research and can tell you what you will do with it under their employ. If you do not like the government telling you how the results and projects they fund will be used there is always the EU.

a reply to: Jaellma


So is it a science protest, or political?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: RightInThere

So in order to be an engineer, I have to cite climate change articles?

Didn't you hear?

In the brave new politically correct world, specialty in climate change is now a requirement for engineering.

Gotta know Al Gore's documentary back to front before you can design and build new machines...

I wonder how many people whom aren't scientists will be at the gathering...

Or would it be more correct to word it as how many newly emerging scientists we'll have all of the sudden this month for the event?

I suppose BLM and MoveOn have Scientist Divisions in their hierarchies?

And can we look forward to these "scientists" breaking windows and committing hate crime atrocities to suspected Trump supporters?

originally posted by: MisterSpock
You'd think the vast majority of these people would be too busy to attend, too important to take the time off and too intelligent to fall for the usual brainwashed foolery common of party politics.

They are all smarter than you.

Every. Single. One.

a reply to: Ohanka

Not to get too off topic, but I've always had questions about temperature data collected.

What kind of devices were used?
Were they the same types of devices used?
If not, were the variances studied?
Were the devices calibrated?
Who did the calibration?
If so, where is the documentation?
Were temperatures taken at the same time at the same location?
Were variances in location taken into consideration?

Awwww the poor babies upset they not get anymore free money to make up fairytales .