Politicized Science Is A Threat To Science

Discussion in 'Conservation' started by Klickrolf, Nov 2, 2016.

Tags:
  1. hbmcc

    hbmcc Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes Received:
    587
    Religion, the kind that knows the earth is 6 to 7 thousand years old, want's you on their board of directors. It's fitting justice to know that the same dogma of religious persecution is very much alive in the 21st century, nearly a thousand years after the Pope enticed a famous English king into driving heathens from Jerusalem. Justice being your double edged sword only rewards you with bankruptcy. And, pooh all over.

    You need substantive proof for your premise, freestone.
     
  2. freestoneangler

    freestoneangler Not to be confused with Freestone

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    9,503
    Likes Received:
    3,593
    Location:
    Ruby Valley, MT
    The burden of proof rests with the climate alarmists who have created the fiction. Meanwhile, we're loving this extended warm weather here in southwest Montana.
     
  3. hbmcc

    hbmcc Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes Received:
    587
    I think someone on WFF said it best about weather... It's raining if you don't see Rainier, and; going to rain if you do see the mountain. The past week has been alternating rain, and going to. A day each.

    Actually, you are in the alarmist camp. But, I won't bother you while you hide in denial.
     
    Alex MacDonald and dfl like this.
  4. Klickrolf

    Klickrolf Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,724
    Likes Received:
    931
    Location:
    Klickitat, Washington
    As a proud denier I am alarmed by "the" certainty that has yet to be confirmed by science. Climate alarmists have pushed catastrophic global warming due to human CO2 emission yet all modeled predictions have failed notably. Why is that? That is because the models don't understand how to deal with unknown variables. This of course occurs because those who design the models don't understand how to deal with unknown variables. The earth's climate is considered a chaotic system by scientists. That means they don't understand the chaos. CO2 will never explain the changes in climate because the historic proxies just plain don't conform.

    The intent of this thread was to help people think about government funding of science and what it actually means. It's true what Ike stated 55 years ago, "A steadily increasing share [of scientific research] is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government. Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. . . . The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.

    An earlier post suggested we deniers are the ones funding the "fake" science. I submit that I have a legal right to fund fake science (free speech) with my money if I so choose. I also submit the government has no right to increase my tax burden to fund fake science regardless of their intent. If you can't see how this works you aren't looking!
     
    Alex MacDonald likes this.
  5. Chris Johnson

    Chris Johnson Member: Native Fish Society

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    3,506
    Likes Received:
    1,638
    Location:
    Bellingham Wa.
  6. Chris Johnson

    Chris Johnson Member: Native Fish Society

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    3,506
    Likes Received:
    1,638
    Location:
    Bellingham Wa.
    If we don't fund science through government grants then who will? Agri business, Oil companies, Wall street banks? Of course now days they are pretty close to one in the same.
     
    dfl likes this.
  7. hbmcc

    hbmcc Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2014
    Messages:
    1,471
    Likes Received:
    587
    Anyone know a source of unbiased news? Political, technical, scientific news?
     
  8. Alex MacDonald

    Alex MacDonald that's His Lordship, to you.....

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    5,703
    Likes Received:
    3,169
    Location:
    Haus Alpenrosa, Lederhosenland
    the first crusade was launched on 27 November 1095 by Pope Urban II, and was a response to an appeal from the Emperor Alexios Komnenos for aid in repelling the Turks from Constantinople. The Seljuk Turks were the invaders, not the Christians. I'm also curious as to which "famous English king" you refer to?
     
    Gene S and Jim Ficklin like this.
  9. psycho

    psycho Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,077
    Likes Received:
    682
    Location:
    B.C. Canada
    Probably Richard the First.
     
  10. Alex MacDonald

    Alex MacDonald that's His Lordship, to you.....

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    5,703
    Likes Received:
    3,169
    Location:
    Haus Alpenrosa, Lederhosenland
    He'd be wrong. Almost a hundred years too early. Richard was born in September of 1157. If you want a decent movie about the situation just before the beginning of the 3rd crusade, Kingdom of Heaven. These events really took place in 1187 or so. Balian of Ibelin-the main character in the movie, was a real person, although most of the plot and "love interest" is complete bullshit. Richard and Saladin did meet more than once; in fact, Richard was ill, and Saladin sent his personal physicians to attend the king.

    How can you go wrong teaching this stuff? Knights in armor, damsels in distress, fighting, fencing, ogres, giants, more fighting, intrigue, poisons, witches, dragons, did I mention fighting?
     
  11. Klickrolf

    Klickrolf Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,724
    Likes Received:
    931
    Location:
    Klickitat, Washington
    I think your suggestion is perfect! Gofundme.com would be the "ideal" solution. With something like that the funders could discuss/debate the scientific potential and vote with their money, and those requesting the funds could address potential issues. Nothing could be more democratic than that. If you don't care about any of it you don't pay for any of it, if you do care about any of it you pay for what you get. All useful scientific questions with an acceptable and repeatable plan would be funded, obviously. That of course requires all taxing and public utility types remove themselves from Science and use their resources to improve the lives of their citizens in proven ways.

    Now back to the Crusades, hoping I can find and view "Kingdom of Heaven" online.
     
    Alex MacDonald likes this.
  12. Chris Johnson

    Chris Johnson Member: Native Fish Society

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    3,506
    Likes Received:
    1,638
    Location:
    Bellingham Wa.
    Ya, if you have a lot of money. The only things that would be properly funded would be science that made the rich richer.
     
    Salmo_g likes this.
  13. Klickrolf

    Klickrolf Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,724
    Likes Received:
    931
    Location:
    Klickitat, Washington
    Not if everything were transparent...
    Real and useful science doesn't recognize rich or richer. That's the beauty of it. All science that leads to the most accurate conclusions will benefit everyone. It shouldn't have anything to do with the rich or the corp interests, corps and taxers could easily be disallowed to contribute. The science would be required to pass the test of the funders, fake science never could, it's economics at it's purest. You can't buy real science, you can only search for it. This suggestion assumes a serious scientific debate between interested parties would occur because if you choose to fund you think it's real and useful.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2016
  14. Chris Johnson

    Chris Johnson Member: Native Fish Society

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    3,506
    Likes Received:
    1,638
    Location:
    Bellingham Wa.
    We can't stop corporate interests from buying our government, how are we going to stop them from buying science?
     
  15. Klickrolf

    Klickrolf Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,724
    Likes Received:
    931
    Location:
    Klickitat, Washington
    Governments are easy to buy, Science requires supporting data and useful interpretation. Money can't buy that.

    Fake science would disappear almost immediately because it wouldn't be supportable and therefore unfundable. Any investment in unsupportable science would be a lost investment.

    http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ees.2016.0223
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2016