• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

March for Science

ocean515 said:
Last time I checked, "science" as a discipline and field of study, extended beyond the question of human origin and into a myriad of areas including medical, chemical, electrical, space, etc..

Do you think science only applies to the issue of human origin? I certainly don't, but you're welcome to your own beliefs.
Click to expand...

Yes but if you have someone who denies a fundamental piece of science, then that is troubling you see.
 
Dittohead not! said:
The march was not ideological.
I'm not trying to inject religion into the thread.
I'm just pointing out why the organizers think there is a need for a march for science. One would think that, in the 21st. century, science would no longer be controversial.

But, it must be.
Click to expand...

Well, it seems to me it must have been ideological. As I originally stated, I think there are very few people who don't believe in science. With that in mind, it seems rather clear the organizers want people to suspend reality when listening to the message they tried to invent through the march.

Origin of man is not the singular home of all science. As such, introducing a creationism example to prove a lack of belief in science in general fails because most rational people understand science covers far more ground than just the origin of man.
 
calamity said:
Back in 1969, when I saw us put a man on the moon, I was reasonably sure that if I lived to 2017, we'd have bases on other planets, flying cars, and clean energy....no way in a million years did I predict we would have to march to save science from being hijacked by ignorant morons.

Now, I am just waiting for the day when President Comacho signs the executive order demanding we begin irrigating crops with Gatorade.

March for Science Demonstrators Say They'''re the Real Patriots - NBC News
Click to expand...

Back in '69 science was respectable, now you see the political dolts who use it for gain angry someone's not playing their game and they are throwing a tantrum.
 
katzgar said:
That is one of the most Twisted statements you've ever made
Click to expand...

Really? I think it's rather clear. Let me put it another way, if that will help you.

What kind of scientist believes there are so many people who don't believe in science that they must march in order to bring attention to it?
 
Jetboogieman said:
Yes but if you have someone who denies a fundamental piece of science, then that is troubling you see.
Click to expand...

Faith is a fickle thing. I can imagine it's hard for those who have no faith to understand.

However, if a person be of faith, it certainly doesn't prove they don't believe in science.

Although I never met him personally, my great uncle was reported to be a person of strong faith, and he was awarded a Nobel Prize in physics. That suggest he certainly believed in science.

I guess some would suggest his faith cancelled out his "scientist" credentials, in spite of his Nobel Prize.
 
ocean515 said:
Beyond the rhetoric, I think there are likely few people who don't believe in science.
Click to expand...

Not so fast there, Skippy. In many cases science does not even know all of the answers (or even which questions are important to be answered) - does that mean that science does not believe in science?

In short, hot water does freeze sooner than cold water under a wide range of circumstances. It is not impossible, and has been seen to occur in a number of experiments. However, despite claims often made by one source or another, there is no well-agreed explanation for how this phenomenon occurs. Different mechanisms have been proposed, but the experimental evidence is inconclusive.
Click to expand...

Can hot water freeze faster than cold water?

When it comes to something as complex as AGW there is not a single accepted forrmula such as if X amount of CO2 (or some other "pollutant") is added to (or subtracted from) the Earth's atmosphere then Y degrees of global average heating (or cooling) will occur in Z amount of time.
 
Last edited:
ocean515 said:
Last time I checked, "science" as a discipline and field of study, extended beyond the question of human origin and into a myriad of areas including medical, chemical, electrical, space, etc..

Do you think science only applies to the issue of human origin? I certainly don't, but you're welcome to your own beliefs.
Click to expand...

I certainly does apply to issues of climate change.
 
RE: scientific organizations on global warming:
ocean515 said:
I can't say for sure, but I would think they are not as hobbled by ideology as some people offering opinions reveal themselves to be, so it's likely what you're suggesting is not accurate.
Click to expand...

Consensus opinions from as disparate sources as the Australian Academy of Sciences to the South African Society of climate scientists care very little for the ideologies of American politics. It is an international scientific consensus.
 
ocean515 said:
Well, it seems to me it must have been ideological. As I originally stated, I think there are very few people who don't believe in science. With that in mind, it seems rather clear the organizers want people to suspend reality when listening to the message they tried to invent through the march.

Origin of man is not the singular home of all science. As such, introducing a creationism example to prove a lack of belief in science in general fails because most rational people understand science covers far more ground than just the origin of man.
Click to expand...

OK, let's pick a new example:

Safety of vaccines?
Global warming?
Testing water for lead?
Just tuning out whenever any sort of scientific subject comes up?
Looking down on "nerds?"


There are other examples of why this march was needed.
 
ocean515 said:
Really? I think it's rather clear. Let me put it another way, if that will help you.

What kind of scientist believes there are so many people who don't believe in science that they must march in order to bring attention to it?
Click to expand...

More Americans believe in Bigfoot, Elvis sightings, and UFO abductions than in evolutionary biology, big bang cosmology, or climate change science. That right there certainly deserves a march.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Not so fast there, Skippy. In many cases science does not even know all of the answers (or even which questions are important to be answered) - does that mean that science does not believe in science?

Can hot water freeze faster than cold water?

When it comes to something as complex as AGW there is not a single accepted forrmula such as if X amount of CO2 (or some other "pollutant") is added to (or subtracted from) the Earth's atmosphere then Y degrees of global average heating (or cooling) will occur in Z amount of time.
Click to expand...

Slow down Chucky. I don't have a clue what you're trying to say. What does my statement have to do with what you stated in your first sentence? :confused:
 
ocean515 said:
Faith is a fickle thing. I can imagine it's hard for those who have no faith to understand.

However, if a person be of faith, it certainly doesn't prove they don't believe in science.

Although I never met him personally, my great uncle was reported to be a person of strong faith, and he was awarded a Nobel Prize in physics. That suggest he certainly believed in science.

I guess some would suggest his faith cancelled out his "scientist" credentials, in spite of his Nobel Prize.
Click to expand...


When faith contradicts scientific observations and conclusions, one has to go. It should be the faith part. But usually, it's the science part: whether it's the Catholic Church threatening to burn Galileo alive at the stake for questioning centuries of its teaching that the Earth is at the center of the universe, to American Evangelicals refusing the teaching of basic evolutionary biology in public schools, to Jehovah's witnesses refusing potentially lifesaving blood transfusions for their chidren.
 
ocean515 said:
Really? I think it's rather clear. Let me put it another way, if that will help you.

What kind of scientist believes there are so many people who don't believe in science that they must march in order to bring attention to it?
Click to expand...


yup, thats pretty much just as twisted.
 
ataraxia said:
I certainly does apply to issues of climate change.
Click to expand...

Of course. I think I would be safe in saying most people believe in climate science. I think the issue of climate change is something different.

If someone takes issue with the theory and prescription, I don't think that indicates they don't believe in science.

Not every climate scientist is in agreement on the issue. Does that mean those in disagreement don't believe in science?
 
ataraxia said:
RE: scientific organizations on global warming:


Consensus opinions from as disparate sources as the Australian Academy of Sciences to the South African Society of climate scientists care very little for the ideologies of American politics. It is an international scientific consensus.
Click to expand...

Yes, this has how the issue has played out regarding climate change.

I remind you, this thread is about a march for science, not a march for climate change.

Of course, perhaps I'm mistaken, and it was a march for climate change, and the promoters invented a meme for it to support the politics behind it.
 
ataraxia said:
More Americans believe in Bigfoot, Elvis sightings, and UFO abductions than in evolutionary biology, big bang cosmology, or climate change science. That right there certainly deserves a march.
Click to expand...

Yes, it does, along with a certain amount of fear, trepidation, and wondering what is wrong with so many of the public.
 
ocean515 said:
Slow down Chucky. I don't have a clue what you're trying to say. What does my statement have to do with what you stated in your first sentence? :confused:
Click to expand...

Does someone who believes in science say
However, despite claims often made by one source or another, there is no well-agreed explanation for how this phenomenon occurs. Different mechanisms have been proposed, but the experimental evidence is inconclusive.
Click to expand...
In response to "does hot water freeze before cold water does?"?

Cooling water in containers is a very easy experiment to do yet science does not exist to explain why it sometimes does.

Yet in response to much more complicated questions concerning AGW like "will global sea level will rise one meter by the year 2100 if we do (or don't do) X?" folks are called "deniers" if they say that science currently has no definitive answer.
 
calamity said:
Back in 1969, when I saw us put a man on the moon, I was reasonably sure that if I lived to 2017, we'd have bases on other planets, flying cars, and clean energy....no way in a million years did I predict we would have to march to save science from being hijacked by ignorant morons.

Now, I am just waiting for the day when President Comacho signs the executive order demanding we begin irrigating crops with Gatorade.

March for Science Demonstrators Say They'''re the Real Patriots - NBC News
Click to expand...

We might have those things if scientists didn't spend so much time trying to defend their global warming hoax.
 
ocean515 said:
Of course. I think I would be safe in saying most people believe in climate science. I think the issue of climate change is something different.

If someone takes issue with the theory and prescription, I don't think that indicates they don't believe in science.

Not every climate scientist is in agreement on the issue. Does that mean those in disagreement don't believe in science?
Click to expand...

About as many climate scientists today agree on climate change as evolutionary biologists who agree on evolutionary biology. Every profession is going to have some kooks and charlatans in it.
 
Dittohead not! said:
OK, let's pick a new example:

Safety of vaccines?
Global warming?
Testing water for lead?
Just tuning out whenever any sort of scientific subject comes up?
Looking down on "nerds?"


There are other examples of why this march was needed.
Click to expand...

So if a person questions the safety of vaccines, they don't believe in science?

I could be wrong, but the real purpose of this march appears rather obvious.
 
apdst said:
We might have those things if scientists didn't spend so much time trying to defend their global warming hoax.
Click to expand...

There is no hoax. But I think that the only way you are going to believe that is when Trump tells you, like with Obama's birth certificate. Until then, scientists can scream themselves hoarse til the cows come home, and you will be sure it's a hoax.

Well, that, or until you have to paddle to work in a canoe.
 
ocean515 said:
What does it say about today's scientists that they believe there are people who don't believe in it....
Click to expand...

What does it say about those "who don't believe in it"?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Does someone who believes in science say

In response to "does hot water freeze before cold water does?"?

Cooling water in containers is a very easy experiment to do yet science does not exist to explain why it sometimes does.

Yet in response to much more complicated questions concerning AGW like "will global sea level will rise one meter by the year 2100 if we do (or don't do) X?" folks are called "deniers" if they say that science currently has no definitive answer.
Click to expand...

No. They are called "deniers" if they cheer someone who says AGW is a Chinese hoax designed to make US manufacturing non-competitive.
 
ataraxia said:
About as many climate scientists today agree on climate change as evolutionary biologists who agree on evolutionary biology. Every profession is going to have some kooks and charlatans in it.
Click to expand...

Push comes to shove, I suspect Ocean has his doubts about evolution too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom