What Exactly Are People Marching for When They March for Science?

Y'know, no matter WHERE I put this, it's going to turn political.

So I put it here.

Because: science!

STANDARD DISCLOSURE:
1. I think that most of you by now know or have figured out that I'm a scientist (retired.)
2. A friend's husband is quoted in the article.

What Exactly Are People Marching for When They March for Science?
by Ed Young
Thi s is an article found in the online version of "The Atlantic"

The March for Science began unceremoniously on January 25, with vague ambitions, a hastily designed logo, and a Facebook page inspired by a throwaway Reddit comment. Six weeks later, and it has blossomed into a huge movement. It has attracted both support and controversy, and a deluge of opinion pieces about whether it should take place at all. At least one thing is clear: It is definitely happening. On April 22, coinciding with Earth Day, large crowds will take to the streets of Washington, D.C. and over 360 other cities. Across six continents, they will, as stated, march for science.

Which means what, exactly?

“Science” isn’t a monolithic entity. The term contains multitudes. There’s empiricism itself, and the primacy of evidence in making sense of the world. There’s the scientific method—a system for gathering evidence. There are the various fields and sub-fields in which that method is used. There are the people who deploy it—scientists obviously, but also teachers, journalists, doctors, and more. Given that plurality, I wondered, what exactly are people marching for when they’re marching for science?

The author of the article interviewed people and listed 21 statements that were common responses to "why are you marching?" - and in the end said, "that's a lot of statements." It doesn't fit neatly on a placard, and it makes a lousy bumper sticker unless you're into reading really teeny words at a distance of 10 feet or more. It would be easy if there was just one issue, but frankly the whole thing has snowballed to the point where it's turning into a "messy problem."

The article goes into a lot of the negatives I read on ATS - the backlash against science and intellectual "ivory tower" professors and more. I get the feeling that the writer (Ed Young) may be among those who are sympathetic but think that this will be just a one-time event and then we'll go back to papers and labs and yelling at data sets in the dark corner office.

Because it's a messy problem, some of our colleagues have said "don't bother" and "it's ineffective." Yes, thank you, I've had people say this to my face. But here's the thing about a "messy problem" (and I am using the sociological definition here) - if you do nothing, the situation continues or gets worse. On the other hand, one of the best strategies for dealing with this type of problem (see, I told you I was a scientist) is to do collaborative solutions - empower everyone with the tools to chip away at whatever sections they can of this big mess and (eventually) change the parameters. So if we all show up, we all feel as if we're not alone, we all discuss and learn things that we feel we can do and we all go home and make changes in our little corner of the world. Some little changes never get noticed. A few get adopted, and some go viral and make a large change to the situation.

You never know who will be part of that tipping point.

I believe that here and now this is important. Your mileage may vary.



EndNote:
If you or someone you know is interested in this march, the web page is here: www.marchforscience.com...
And the Skedaddle page (help you find a cheap ride) is here: www.marchforscience.com...

a reply to: Byrd

I am no closer to understanding why the 'March for Science" is happening.
Just do your jobs.

a reply to: D8Tee

I am no closer to understanding why the 'March for Science" is happening.

I do.
www.scientificamerican.com...

Whether or not you "believe" in AGW. It's hard to understand how cutting the flow of climate data can be beneficial.

I think people who march are just looking for an excuse to get out of the house and looking for a way to fill a void in their lives.

For the most part.

a reply to: MysticPearl

Professor Jim Gates, former adviser to Barack Obama, told journalists that the march appeared to lack an end goal – a prerequisite for political action – and would simply be perceived as “science against Trump”. “At least as far as I can detect, there is no theory of action behind this,” he said. “This bothers me tremendously. “To have science represented as this political force I think is just extraordinarily dangerous.”

judithcurry.com...

J. Curry couldn't quite make sense of it either, so I'm not alone.

Science is a lie, just like this entire reality is a lie. Just a bunch of rules in a game/a scripted show. Doesn't mean it's the "truth". Just the truth (which is constantly changing) in the game of life....well, this game of life.

(but you all continue to suspend your disbelief and keep playing house. It's all good)

a reply to: Byrd

It will be difficult to show most of the crowd here why it is important or useful to march for science. The really stupid ones will say it is to fill time.

a reply to: FlukeSkywalker

Science is a lie, just like this entire reality is a lie.

He said...while using a device and system which depend entirely on the principles described by...science. But that's ok. The wheel and fire are good enough for me.

a reply to: Phage

I can't help that I keep waking up here for some reason, but thanks for your insight. I'm fairly sure I've been kidnapped and am being forced to be a pawn.

a reply to: Byrd

I think you also described in the following quoted paragraph why people are also marching for other reasons right now:

Because it's a messy problem, some of our colleagues have said "don't bother" and "it's ineffective." Yes, thank you, I've had people say this to my face. But here's the thing about a "messy problem" (and I am using the sociological definition here) - if you do nothing, the situation continues or gets worse. On the other hand, one of the best strategies for dealing with this type of problem (see, I told you I was a scientist) is to do collaborative solutions - empower everyone with the tools to chip away at whatever sections they can of this big mess and (eventually) change the parameters. So if we all show up, we all feel as if we're not alone, we all discuss and learn things that we feel we can do and we all go home and make changes in our little corner of the world. Some little changes never get noticed. A few get adopted, and some go viral and make a large change to the situation.

You never know who will be part of that tipping point.

Anti-intellectualism has become so common that some people may feel like it's reaching a breaking point. If you don't speak up now, there may not be anything left to speak up about later. Constantly having to explain the value of your existence and the various ways your "kind" has contributed to society can certainly be both daunting and frustrating. But don't give up. Keep speaking up, march & mingle with your brethren, and keep chipping away at the "messy problem" (as you put it).

a reply to: Phage

The wheel and fire

Tis witchcraft i say .

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: D8Tee

I am no closer to understanding why the 'March for Science" is happening.

I do.
www.scientificamerican.com...

Whether or not you "believe" in AGW. It's hard to understand how cutting the flow of climate data can be beneficial.

Satellites gonna fall out of the sky kinda funding cuts? No, i am not for that, but I don't set the rules.

a reply to: D8Tee
Right.
Neither do the scientists. But they sorta kinda want to let the admin know how they feel about things.


Get it now? Waste of time and energy of course...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: D8Tee
Right.
Neither do the scientists. But they sorta kinda want to let the admin know how they feel about things.


Get it now? Waste of time and energy of course...

Well it is likely a waste of time and energy, but maybe it will have an impact.
At least they are trying, I'm sure it will be a peaceful protest, nothing wrong with that.

a reply to: D8Tee

Well it is likely a waste of time and energy, but maybe it will have an impact.

Demonstrations are dumb. Right?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: D8Tee

Well it is likely a waste of time and energy, but maybe it will have an impact.

Demonstrations are dumb. Right?

No, they are not dumb, I just don't see this one having any impact is all. Which demonstrations can you recall from the last 20 years that have changed anything?

a reply to: D8Tee
Well, "Occupy" certainly didn't. But then, it was sort of disjointed.
Other than that, I can't think of any widespread efforts. But 2 decades is a pretty narrow window.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: D8Tee
Well, "Occupy" certainly didn't. But then, it was sort of disjointed.
Other than that, I can't think of any widespread efforts. But 2 decades is a pretty narrow window.

Lets go back further and see what we can come up with?

a reply to: D8Tee
Easy peasy.
www.history.com...
www.nps.gov...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: D8Tee
Easy peasy.
www.history.com...
www.nps.gov...

Excellent, thank you. Have a couple more?