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.

 

The March for Science Because There is No Planet B

page: 2
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 02:37 AM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

The March for Politicized "Science" Because We Just Cant Quit Running Out Of Reasons To Protest And Riot Because We're Totally Nuts Because Hillary Lost Because Of Russia And Sexists And Stuff And This Is Just What We Do Now Forever More




posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 03:11 AM
link   
Scientists are mad about all the easy money for publishing hogwash is drying up. All the scientists in the world can't predict the weather in two weeks from now, but were suppose to believe they can predict the climate in 5-20 years from now.



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 03:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

Just to be clear medicine is NOT science, its medicine. Unfortunately it is not subject to the same rigorous methodology. I have worked in both fields and I was shocked at how unscientific medicine really is. Terrifying really.

I would say at best that medicine (vaccines etc) is the application of science to the treatment of illnesses.

Mind you science and peer review is not the holy grail either, you will find peer review processes can end up a battle of beliefs and agendas more than scientific fact.
edit on 22-4-2017 by Charlyboy because: Improve the clarity of my comment.



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 03:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Charlyboy

People who create vaccines are chemists.



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 03:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

I worked in the vaccine industry and yes there were biochemists involved but we were mostly immunologists. However the development of vaccines was a little less scientific and a bit more guess work using bioinformatics as a way to narrow our focus. What we did tend to ignore was long term effects of drugs and even vaccines, there was never a thought to things like epigenetic issues that may arise in later generations.

Just because educated people with university degrees work on something doesn't make it science.



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 04:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Echo007
There was a point we couldn't get funding for research unless it had some global warming spin on it. All the money was being diverted into this area so of course we all went where the money was. There were very few individuals who even thought about global warming where I was working, we just used the phrase to get funding to do our research.

Personally I think the climate change issue is going to be the most damaging issues to science in modern times. Regardless of the reality of climate science I have seen data manipulation (massaging data), lies for a prize and any time you hear 'the science is settled' you know it isn't science!



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 04:10 AM
link   
You know what would be a free solution.... Change Human Behaviour. At present we are merely Cavemen with gadgets... Monkey is what monkey does and Apophis won't have patience for the dumb ape.



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 04:12 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse


Throwing money at science?

Isn't research how we learn new things?

So we should just stop learning new things because it costs money...
Oh boy...



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 04:21 AM
link   
a reply to: TruMcCarthy

Global warming will eventually be the direct cause of the next ice age.

The desalination of the oceans from glacial melting will change the prevailing currents in the ocean. Meaning that nice warm gulf stream will never reach Europe.

I read an entire thesis on it but it was a long time ago and I don't remember the whole mechanics. Something about the weight of fresh water vs the weight of salt water.

So the nice and cozy warmth will be short-lived.



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 04:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Charlyboy

What was your role in the industry?



However the development of vaccines was a little less scientific and a bit more guess work using bioinformatics as a way to narrow our focus. What we did tend to ignore was long term effects of drugs and even vaccines, there was never a thought to things like epigenetic issues that may arise in later generations.


I'm not sure how epigenetics can be considered without multi-generational studies. It wouldn't be reasonable to extend development over, say, 50 years to study effects on three generations of people. The Ebola vaccine, for example, has had the momentum of urgency and its effects on the vaccinated will be recorded in the years to come.



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 04:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
If Global Warming is real, we will adapt, we did in the past when it was even warmer than today, and when it was colder than today. If it is man made, too bad, we're not going back to the pre-industrial era - trying to force that onto civilization will cause far more harm to the populace than a very slight rise in temperature. We need to continue on our path, adapt to any changes that come our way, while trying to find better forms of energy.

Do you have any idea as the consequences of climate changes? Vast swathes of land that will become desert that are currently just arable. The migration of millions of people away from these areas. The vast majority of cities underwater (they tend to be coastal ). Humans will survive for sure but when millions of people start to move for food and water what then happens?....WAR that's what.



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 05:07 AM
link   
a reply to: lostbook

One question for all global warming followers. How much carbon does a volcano eruption emit?

I have read that the eruption of one volcano does enough damage to undo all the prevention we as humans do in 10 years. I do not have sources but even without sources we know that a volcano eruption emits massive co2 into the atmosphere . I am not saying that we shouldn't change our habits, but as another poster has said using solar and wind power more would be the most beneficial to our planet. Co2 will still be emitted into the atmosphere in massive amounts through natural causes and unless we can figure out how to stop things like volcanoes we will not stop "global warming".

Man was just a figure of the imagination during the last ice age and it still happened. Spending money on figuring out if there is going to be a repeat of past history is a waste. It will repeat!! There no need to spend anymore money researching that.

The biggest problem we need to solve as humans is greed. If we could figure out how to solve that one small problem the world would become a much better place to live. It would solve all off the issues discussed in this post and more. There was wind power used long before fossil fuels were discovered, but because money couldn't be made off of it it was pushed back in favor of "better" ways. It would end world hunger. etc...



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 05:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

I designed vaccines from antigen content to new tech using DNA instead of protein, I was part of a governmental body not commercial. One of the many issues in medical science is the comparatively short trial lengths using animal models. I completely understand the difficulty of observing multi generational effects, what I am communicating is the fact that this is not even considered. Medicine is an art, it should be acknowledged as such. Each and everyone of us are different and we respond uniquely to therapies including vaccines. I am not arguing that medicine does not employ science in its development, what I want to assert is that medicine is an art and should be recognised as such.



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 05:28 AM
link   
I think the ocean vents produce more in a day than we ever have but lets just all blame ourselves for it



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 05:35 AM
link   
And another thing all these scientists will be hammering the ⛽️ to get to this march while hammering away on the laptops or ipads which is ironic really YAWN



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 05:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: lostbook

The March for Politicized "Science" Because We Just Cant Quit Running Out Of Reasons To Protest And Riot Because We're Totally Nuts Because Hillary Lost Because Of Russia And Sexists And Stuff And This Is Just What We Do Now Forever More


I am surprised you didnt use your classic liberals = nazis to attempt discredit it. It is a march against politicized science (GOP climate denial being the biggest example) but you try to turn it around and claim its pushing politicized science.

**slow clap**



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 06:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Denoli
And another thing all these scientists will be hammering the ⛽️ to get to this march while hammering away on the laptops or ipads which is ironic really YAWN


The march is to highlight the significant budget cuts under Trump's administration and the value of science. It's not a march to 'prove climate change.'

I've seen 100s of ATS posts criticising science. Vaccinated, sitting on composite furniture in air-conditioned homes and typing comments onto the internet. Strong teeth, long lives, cars in the drive, fridges full of imported food. Science is such a waste of time!


a reply to: Charlyboy

Are art and science mutually exclusive?

Would you say your position is supported by other chemists? I'm familiar with people defining psychology as pseudoscience or soft science, but haven't met anyone who redefines medical chemistry as an art. I can understand it being 'an art' in the same way success in any field can be considered 'an art.'

If you're saying medical chemistry is nothing more than an art, I disagree. A problem with the internet is how easily posts can be misconstrued and I could be seeing disagreement where this is none.



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 06:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Kandinsky

I would say the application of medicine is an art, no I don't think they are mutually exclusive. I do have a number of friends who are GP's or specialists and a few are very passionate about their profession being an art and they have some some heated debates with peers about this. The art comes from working with people, prescribing drugs on a clinical observation basis not a by weight basis (a simple explanation).

I was a trained geneticist/immunologist and honestly I think there was more art involved in my work. Working with biological systems is certainly more art than science. Biology wasn't even considered science in the early days, in fact statistical analysis of biological systems was introduced to make it 'scientific'.

It may simply be a question of semantics but I deeply believe that medicine needs to be regarded as an art, then we might see a reduction of deaths from over prescribed drugs and allergies.

Being a perfectionist and idealist makes human existence perpetually frustrating



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 06:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: yorkshirelad

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
If Global Warming is real, we will adapt, we did in the past when it was even warmer than today, and when it was colder than today. If it is man made, too bad, we're not going back to the pre-industrial era - trying to force that onto civilization will cause far more harm to the populace than a very slight rise in temperature. We need to continue on our path, adapt to any changes that come our way, while trying to find better forms of energy.

Do you have any idea as the consequences of climate changes? Vast swathes of land that will become desert that are currently just arable. The migration of millions of people away from these areas. The vast majority of cities underwater (they tend to be coastal ). Humans will survive for sure but when millions of people start to move for food and water what then happens?....WAR that's what.


Don't worry. Nuclear Winter will completely offset Global Warming. Let the new ice age begin.



posted on Apr, 22 2017 @ 06:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: WUNK22
What the hell is NASA doing in the great global warming swindle?? They should keep their focus on space! As far as co2 and great die offs do to crop failure. I thought 2* warming and high co2 was supposed to be helpful for crop development. I guess fact will always prove whatever the agenda is, pro or anti. Humans, they make me sick!!


NASA study earth sciences as part of the interaction with extraterrestial objects like the Sun and Moon. Since the Sun is an energy source, it has an effect on Earth's atmosphere and weather as well as the other planets and moonlets. Both the Moon has and Sun cause gravitational effects such as tides and ocean currents, so those get studied too. Now they have to figure what is caused by nature and what is caused by humans. They also study other planets, to study how their climats and atmospheres work. The fascinating thing is that no matter how cold the planet, there are always going to be some elements that are solid and some that are liquid.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join