The March for Science Because There is No Planet B

The change in climate is so minute it takes millions of years to change 1 C. Earth changes on geologic time, not in matters of days or years. These scientists are nobodies compared to Galileo, Newton, Archimedes, Pythagoras, Euclid, Maxwell, Planck, Heisenberg, Schroedinger, Einstein, Gauss. True scientists do it for passion, not for money like these swindler work for.

a reply to: Greven

Here I made this just for you:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Enjoy!!!

Before anyone tries to educate a conservative on climate change, just know they also believe that dinosaur bones are a trick of the devil.

We'll be deep into solutions before these stunted minds catch up to reality.... if they ever do.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

just know they also believe that dinosaur bones are a trick of the devil.

The March for Science has a hidden agenda. The key is the date: 22 April. The same date as Earth Day and Cannabis Day. These three events all have the same hidden agenda: to use science and drugs to hijack our consciousness and persuade us to become one with their Earth goddess. Their Orwellian newspeak for this is 'connectivity'.

Their vehicle is Global Citizen, and their entry point is vaccines. This Gaia/mother Earth religion is the philosophy of our elite corporations, NGOs, banks, governments via the UN and even Pope Francis. The amazing thing is that they have documented their own conspiracies in detail. It all sounds like some weird story, but all of the puzzle pieces fit perfectly.

Check all the facts here: Global Citizen News

The March for Science: how you were duped... again

Their logos and colour schemes will make you sit up and take notice too: The Symbol of the Scarlet Ring


a reply to: lostbook

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Greven

Here I made this just for you:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Enjoy!!!

How?

You addressed none of the 4 points underlying man-made climate change theory.

a reply to: Greven

I saw your bet and raised you 10 over.

Yeah we know greenhouse gases warm, and we know we're raising them. But beyond that point we have no clue the actual impact our CO2 is having, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.

For anyone to claim with certainty anything beyond that any item really of any specificity no matter the position becomes total FAITH.

HOW you ask? If you're such an expert my work there should jump right out at you? Nothing to say there??? Afraid of the thread are you?

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
Before anyone tries to educate a conservative on climate change, just know they also believe that dinosaur bones are a trick of the devil.

We'll be deep into solutions before these stunted minds catch up to reality.... if they ever do.

No some of us BElieve that time scale to God ALLOWS FOR EVOLUTION. Our scale of time is way way waaaay off of Gods time scale.

Dinosaurs existed too and the planet is billions of years old. Still does not preclude the existence of God. Also Man and Apes were divergent species and man didnt evolve from Apes,but from a in between and Man was chosen to evolve higher.

Creation in the bible is a simplification to people to understand in the past how earth and man came about.

FORGOT to not reply to the Fake fact poster again. Oopsie.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Sorry, busy prepping for a trip. Might answer there when I have time.

My points were raised in this thread. It seems you are unable to refute them as well. Man-made climate change continues to stand as a theory.

a reply to: ketsuko

That was kind of my point.

So I'll reply here. I am afraid that if I start a new thread about my experiences at the March, the mods will just close it and point to this thread. So I'll save some time and put my report here.



This is my friend. He's a PhD research chemist. The Lego Minifig there is General Leia Organia and the fingers are mine. I'm a PhD Information Scientist (if you haven't figured that one out yet.) The sign says it all for him - the Trump admin is demanding that certain topics not be published (or given to the public.) We're scientists. We say that our research SHOULD be given to the public and to fellow scientists and that subject and scope should NOT be controlled by a pack of lame-brains who don't know the difference between qualitative and quantitative methods and when to apply them.

(ahem) ... and now that I've gotten that out of my system...

You might not want our papers or research or data, but other scientists do and being able to talk about it and exchange data and methods and so forth is the best way to advance science around the world.

Here's an analogy: Imagine that science is an old-fashioned telephone system for a country. What we want to be able to do is pick up our science-phone in Scienceville and call across the country to talk science to someone in SciencePlaya. Policies restricting us would be like having an FBI agent sitting at each phone to make sure you didn't talk about things like... a tornado hit your town, for instance. In some cases the policies would mean that an entire Sciencetown is cut off from the rest of the country -- well, not exactly cut off because you CAN get the data if you pay the corporations that own it (and the cost of getting your hands on this research can be sky-high.

Without government grant programs, universities can't maintain labs to do research.

So that means that all the science will come from companies (like the pharmaceutical industry) and corporations. The rest will be just whatever we can afford to do out of pocket and with smaller grants from foundations like Rockefeller.

And of (sarcasm) COURSE (/sarcasm) you can trust corporations to fairly and honestly report even results that are not in their favor.

Trump doesn't have a science adviser (yet) but at this rate, it's likely to be someone like the owner of a football team or a big industrialist who wouldn't know a neutron from a neuron.

There's another march next week - I won't come to DC again (really, two trips a year are all I can afford since I'm a retiree living on a pension.) I will go to a local march, though.

So you'll see us all again and again over the next four years. Research is long, tedious, often boring, and demands a lot of patience and takes a lot of time. So we're used to playing the long game. Meanwhile, my observations on what made these marches successful and what strategies worked best will be going as a white paper to my local State Representative and to certain other groups who might find it useful.

Oh... and neither of us researches climate change. In fact, I know only one climatologist out of all the scientist I do know.

There's more to science than that. If you equate science with climatology, you're missing a LOT!

a reply to: Byrd

That sign is innaccurate. Science proved we didnt evolve from Apes. thats one common lie told to Us people in school. we have a common ancestor that mutated and voila humans.

a reply to: yuppa

Science never claimed we came from apes to begin with. Only Fundamentalist Christians did as a means of propaganda. Science and Evolution has always claimed Apes and Man have a distant relative we both evolved from.

The sign is a tribute to Planet of the Apes.

It's so retarded that there are still people resisting scientific consensus.

Whats more of a threat climate change or the people that actually want to change the climate.

Right wing politics needs to get out of the business of dumbing people down. If that's the only way they can succeed they should cease to be.

a reply to: Kandinsky

Why is it that the AGwarmist always want to claim "science is on their side"?
What about those thousands of scientists who disagree entirely with the AGW premise? Somehow their scientific knowledge is wrong, when observable natural changes have contradicted the claims from the AGW crowd?

We heard all these false claims that "thousands of scientists from the IPCC agree with the AGW claim", when that claim has been shown to be wrong, and that many scientists who even participated in the IPCC have said the opposite of what "policymakers" claim is occurring.

What about all the lies that have been shown over time from the AGW crowd, and scientists like Mann, Hansen, Jones amongst others?

Thousands and Thousands of Scientists Can't be Behind a Hoax(AGW), Right?

Heck, then there is the fact that even the EPA chief admitted the drastic changes they want to implement, supposedly to stop climate change will only lower temps by a whooping 0.01C. Of course apparently it doesn't even matter that naturally temperatures change by that much without any help from mankind.
EPA Chief concedes climate rule; it's about 'reinventing a global economy

a reply to: spiritualzombie

People (including scientists) resist 'scientific census' because they are free to question. There is no such thing as 'scientific consensus' as science is not an entity, it is a process and it does not adhere to human wishes or assumptions.

We are observers of our environment and of data we generate from processes or machines we invent. If we are not cautious with our observations and diligent with our interpretations we will make mistakes. It is important to have people who question beliefs or we would still be worshipping sun gods or believing we are the centre of the universe. It is this questioning that separates us from other beings.

Human history dictates that it is "retarded" to just accept scientific dogma and not to question it.