Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Exactly.Well, it may be a silly line of questioning, but I like to make sure I understand what folks are saying.
Thank you for answering. We are definitely on the same page, then.
I imagine I wouldn't be wrong in assuming that you are a fan of scientific integrity, as well, based on my understanding of your position?
Indeed. The original topic of this thread was the politicization of science (and journalism) and I believe the recent polarization in society is reflected in the journal process as well. The difference is that science can actually reach verifiable conclusions, and the politicization of science slows that process
....
Or prevents policy from not being adopted.- and prevents policy from being adopted.
Exactly.Indeed. The original topic of this thread was the politicization of science (and journalism) and I believe the recent polarization in society is reflected in the journal process as well. The difference is that science can actually reach verifiable conclusions, and the politicization of science slows that process
....
Or prevents policy from not being adopted.- and prevents policy from being adopted.
Well this is no fun. At least call me a dimwit libtard grandma killer or sumthin.
This forum doesn't really lend itself to even-handed discussions of an academic nature, but I really would be interested in a discussion of steps that might be implemented to improve the peer-review process.
You gramma killer you!
Oh look, Godwin's Law already.
That didn't take long.
Your arrogance gets in your way -and so much so it sure looks like you weren't even able to read my post without distorting it into something it wasn't and didn't do and negative repping me for it even! LOL In fact I think you must have negatively repped me for what someone else said -you accused me of mis-stating Godwin's Law in my post but I can't mis-state something I didn't state whatsoever in the first place.
I had to laugh when I saw you negatively repped me and took umbrage at something I didn't do at all. Your own arrogance got in the way of being able to comprehend the written word and must a real handicap in your life on a daily basis. So let's get the Godwin's Law out of the way first which is just some comedian's humorous remark that the longer a discussion goes on, the higher the probability that someone will end up being compared to Nazis or Hitler. So you saw the word "Nazi" in my post and your mind flew to Godwin's Law? Really?
No one was comparing ANYONE to Nazis or Hitler honey. Apparently you like to read a lot into stuff so you can get all huffy about stuff that was never said, huh. You must be a real kick to live with. I certainly was NOT comparing anyone, much less scientists, to Nazis.
Then you accused of me of showing condescension toward scientists. Where was that? Because while I agree my post DRIPPED with condescension alright - it wasn't toward scientists. It was all reserved for liberals who believe scientists exist in order to be politically exploited. Oh gee, how DID your "oh so brilliant scientist" mind miss that one? And while we are on it, do YOU think scientists who allow themselves to be exploited for political gain are DESERVING of respect? Really? Because I don't. Thank God that fortunately for science itself, that isn't the bulk of them. But for those who allow their political exploitation, conspire with it and profit from it -I wouldn't respect such people no matter what their careers happened to be. What's to respect about that?
You gave a link in a post to scientific papers, saying none showed any political statements. So what? The political exploitation by cooperating scientists wouldn't include any political statements in any of their papers, would it? Their part of the exploitation involves the manipulation of what THEY do -science. So I would expect to find very conveniently packaged "science" to support their political partners. And if you think that hasn't happened -then you are truly ignorant of history, including recent history. It HAPPENS -again, fortunately most scientists have a hell of a lot more integrity than that. But the notion they all do without exception is ridiculous. Less than honest, less than truthful, less than morally upright individuals exist in all fields -including science. If you want to deny that, then again, you are relying upon your own arrogance and not facts to even believe such a dumb thing.
I have a sister who is a microbiologist and while I love her dearly and she is my best friend, I am not under any illusion that merely being one has endowed her with any godlike qualities, it has not given her work one speck of godlike infallibility, it has not given her any "noble-like" crap that puts her above all others. I don't worship at the altar of her work. Scientists are just people who managed to find a job too -a job that makes them no better and no worse than anyone else -and neither is the quality of their work which includes the entire range from excellent to a pile of shit just like every other field of work on the planet! A microbiologist's opinion on an issue outside their field of work -like global warming -doesn't have any more weight than that of anyone else. It is outside their field of expertise. When people throw up statistics about how many and what percentage of scientists outside the field believe about global warming, evolution or any other scientific theory -it is totally irrelevant. It is offered up as if proof of the correctness of the theory -is that how YOUR "scientific" mind actually works? Scientific truth is not determined by a consensus or popularity contest. At times in history NOT ONE PERSON was right and at times thousands had it all wrong and only one person had it right. So let's stop the pretense that scientists hold truth by merely proposing a theory when that theory is to lay the groundwork for further investigation -not the end result!
Those who politically exploit science and those scientists who cooperate with it and join in -are in fact saying the theory itself is the end result and therefore "fact" -and it is a MONSTROUS LIE.
Science never requires our FAITH that it got it right -it must prove it to be right. Only religion requires faith -science NEVER. So I take issue with those who insist we treat scientists like gods -and the arrogant scientists who think they are -and take whatever their theory du jour happens to be as if it were proven fact when it by definition is NOT. As I said -fortunately for science itself, the majority of scientists do not fall among this small group.
But in my original post, my condescension was for those who believe the real role of scientists is their exploitation for political gain -in particular, liberals. So ...since you objected to my comments abut that, you think that is the proper role of scientists and science in society?????
I made several points using historical facts about the misuse of science and the political exploitation of scientists that resulted in causing great harm to millions. ACCURATE ones I might add -one of historic fact. Since I was discussing the misuse of science, then there are no historic examples of that occurring that are suddenly "off limits" or socially inappropriate to use as if it is a social faux pas like farting public or being caught picking your nose.
I pointed out the Soviet example of the political exploitation of science and I pointed out -ACCURATELY -that the Nazi justification for even conceiving the Holocaust was based on the scientific theory of eugenics. Perhaps your "brilliant" scientific mind did not realize this -but this is not a comparison, but a historic fact that perfectly exemplified the dangers of allowing the political exploitation of science. A pretty significant one by any measure. It was NOT a comment comparing scientists or anyone else to Nazis or Hitler. So I guess you have to be a "brilliant" scientist to see a comparison in there that didn't exist. I also pointed out the fact these were all done by leftists -and they were. Just because liberals would like to sweep that under the rug, all comments referencing historical facts about what the Nazis did -aren't comments trying to compare them to someone else. Just because you can't deal with honest assessments of historical facts and importance and think lobbing out a really, really stupid comment that doesn't apply in the least like "Godwin's Law" -doesn't mean no one else is able to discuss what Nazis used to justify their concept of the Holocaust and the extermination of society's "undesirables". That they did it and the grounds they used to rationalize it is a matter of HISTORY and a major example of exactly what I was talking about, isn't it? It is NOT something for you to go into a faux hissy fit as if because it involves Nazis who did it, it automatically means it is off limits as a discussion of how science and scientists were politically exploited in the past.
Again, the political exploitation for the purpose of gaining and expanding their power -is and always has been done by leftists and liberals. The same people who demand we all bow down and worship at the altar of science as if whatever theory they suddenly believe can be exploited for political gain must automatically be treated as "proven fact" and the end product of scientific discovery -when in fact a theory is only the groundwork for further investigation. An investigation that is highly likely to result in tossing the theory out -because that is the nature of scientific progress. The vast majority of all scientific theories as a result are wrong -but it is the process of weeding them out and finding the gem that remains that has and always will result in moving our understanding and knowledge of the natural world forward. No scientist has ever gotten it 100% correct right off the bat and you know you are being exploited when suddenly those who are not scientists but political activists, insist those scientists who would challenge that theory be punished for it as the new "heretics" deserving of being burned at the stake. Challenging that theory and trying to prove it incorrect -is how scientists end up proving any theory correct.
Seriously. Get over yourself -everyone else has.
Oh look, Godwin's Law already.
That didn't take long.
Your arrogance gets in your way -and so much so it sure looks like you weren't even able to read my post without distorting it into something it wasn't and didn't do and negative repping me for it even! LOL In fact I think you must have negatively repped me for what someone else said -you accused me of mis-stating Godwin's Law in my post but I can't mis-state something I didn't state whatsoever in the first place.
I had to laugh when I saw you negatively repped me and took umbrage at something I didn't do at all. Your own arrogance got in the way of being able to comprehend the written word and must a real handicap in your life on a daily basis. So let's get the Godwin's Law out of the way first which is just some comedian's humorous remark that the longer a discussion goes on, the higher the probability that someone will end up being compared to Nazis or Hitler. So you saw the word "Nazi" in my post and your mind flew to Godwin's Law? Really?
No one was comparing ANYONE to Nazis or Hitler honey. Apparently you like to read a lot into stuff so you can get all huffy about stuff that was never said, huh. You must be a real kick to live with. I certainly was NOT comparing anyone, much less scientists, to Nazis.
Then you accused of me of showing condescension toward scientists. Where was that? Because while I agree my post DRIPPED with condescension alright - it wasn't toward scientists. It was all reserved for liberals who believe scientists exist in order to be politically exploited. Oh gee, how DID your "oh so brilliant scientist" mind miss that one? And while we are on it, do YOU think scientists who allow themselves to be exploited for political gain are DESERVING of respect? Really? Because I don't. Thank God that fortunately for science itself, that isn't the bulk of them. But for those who allow their political exploitation, conspire with it and profit from it -I wouldn't respect such people no matter what their careers happened to be. What's to respect about that?
You gave a link in a post to scientific papers, saying none showed any political statements. So what? The political exploitation by cooperating scientists wouldn't include any political statements in any of their papers, would it? Their part of the exploitation involves the manipulation of what THEY do -science. So I would expect to find very conveniently packaged "science" to support their political partners. And if you think that hasn't happened -then you are truly ignorant of history, including recent history. It HAPPENS -again, fortunately most scientists have a hell of a lot more integrity than that. But the notion they all do without exception is ridiculous. Less than honest, less than truthful, less than morally upright individuals exist in all fields -including science. If you want to deny that, then again, you are relying upon your own arrogance and not facts to even believe such a dumb thing.
I have a sister who is a microbiologist and while I love her dearly and she is my best friend, I am not under any illusion that merely being one has endowed her with any godlike qualities, it has not given her work one speck of godlike infallibility, it has not given her any "noble-like" crap that puts her above all others. I don't worship at the altar of her work. Scientists are just people who managed to find a job too -a job that makes them no better and no worse than anyone else -and neither is the quality of their work which includes the entire range from excellent to a pile of shit just like every other field of work on the planet! A microbiologist's opinion on an issue outside their field of work -like global warming -doesn't have any more weight than that of anyone else. It is outside their field of expertise. When people throw up statistics about how many and what percentage of scientists outside the field believe about global warming, evolution or any other scientific theory -it is totally irrelevant. It is offered up as if proof of the correctness of the theory -is that how YOUR "scientific" mind actually works? Scientific truth is not determined by a consensus or popularity contest. At times in history NOT ONE PERSON was right and at times thousands had it all wrong and only one person had it right. So let's stop the pretense that scientists hold truth by merely proposing a theory when that theory is to lay the groundwork for further investigation -not the end result!
Those who politically exploit science and those scientists who cooperate with it and join in -are in fact saying the theory itself is the end result and therefore "fact" -and it is a MONSTROUS LIE.
Science never requires our FAITH that it got it right -it must prove it to be right. Only religion requires faith -science NEVER. So I take issue with those who insist we treat scientists like gods -and the arrogant scientists who think they are -and take whatever their theory du jour happens to be as if it were proven fact when it by definition is NOT. As I said -fortunately for science itself, the majority of scientists do not fall among this small group.
But in my original post, my condescension was for those who believe the real role of scientists is their exploitation for political gain -in particular, liberals. So ...since you objected to my comments abut that, you think that is the proper role of scientists and science in society?????
I made several points using historical facts about the misuse of science and the political exploitation of scientists that resulted in causing great harm to millions. ACCURATE ones I might add -one of historic fact. Since I was discussing the misuse of science, then there are no historic examples of that occurring that are suddenly "off limits" or socially inappropriate to use as if it is a social faux pas like farting public or being caught picking your nose.
I pointed out the Soviet example of the political exploitation of science and I pointed out -ACCURATELY -that the Nazi justification for even conceiving the Holocaust was based on the scientific theory of eugenics. Perhaps your "brilliant" scientific mind did not realize this -but this is not a comparison, but a historic fact that perfectly exemplified the dangers of allowing the political exploitation of science. A pretty significant one by any measure. It was NOT a comment comparing scientists or anyone else to Nazis or Hitler. So I guess you have to be a "brilliant" scientist to see a comparison in there that didn't exist. I also pointed out the fact these were all done by leftists -and they were. Just because liberals would like to sweep that under the rug, all comments referencing historical facts about what the Nazis did -aren't comments trying to compare them to someone else. Just because you can't deal with honest assessments of historical facts and importance and think lobbing out a really, really stupid comment that doesn't apply in the least like "Godwin's Law" -doesn't mean no one else is able to discuss what Nazis used to justify their concept of the Holocaust and the extermination of society's "undesirables". That they did it and the grounds they used to rationalize it is a matter of HISTORY and a major example of exactly what I was talking about, isn't it? It is NOT something for you to go into a faux hissy fit as if because it involves Nazis who did it, it automatically means it is off limits as a discussion of how science and scientists were politically exploited in the past.
Again, the political exploitation for the purpose of gaining and expanding their power -is and always has been done by leftists and liberals. The same people who demand we all bow down and worship at the altar of science as if whatever theory they suddenly believe can be exploited for political gain must automatically be treated as "proven fact" and the end product of scientific discovery -when in fact a theory is only the groundwork for further investigation. An investigation that is highly likely to result in tossing the theory out -because that is the nature of scientific progress. The vast majority of all scientific theories as a result are wrong -but it is the process of weeding them out and finding the gem that remains that has and always will result in moving our understanding and knowledge of the natural world forward. No scientist has ever gotten it 100% correct right off the bat and you know you are being exploited when suddenly those who are not scientists but political activists, insist those scientists who would challenge that theory be punished for it as the new "heretics" deserving of being burned at the stake. Challenging that theory and trying to prove it incorrect -is how scientists end up proving any theory correct.
Seriously. Get over yourself -everyone else has.
Look at all the impotent rage.
Your arrogance gets in your way -and so much so it sure looks like you weren't even able to read my post without distorting it into something it wasn't and didn't do and negative repping me for it even! LOL In fact I think you must have negatively repped me for what someone else said -you accused me of mis-stating Godwin's Law in my post but I can't mis-state something I didn't state whatsoever in the first place.
I had to laugh when I saw you negatively repped me and took umbrage at something I didn't do at all. Your own arrogance got in the way of being able to comprehend the written word and must a real handicap in your life on a daily basis. So let's get the Godwin's Law out of the way first which is just some comedian's humorous remark that the longer a discussion goes on, the higher the probability that someone will end up being compared to Nazis or Hitler. So you saw the word "Nazi" in my post and your mind flew to Godwin's Law? Really?
No one was comparing ANYONE to Nazis or Hitler honey. Apparently you like to read a lot into stuff so you can get all huffy about stuff that was never said, huh. You must be a real kick to live with. I certainly was NOT comparing anyone, much less scientists, to Nazis.
Then you accused of me of showing condescension toward scientists. Where was that? Because while I agree my post DRIPPED with condescension alright - it wasn't toward scientists. It was all reserved for liberals who believe scientists exist in order to be politically exploited. Oh gee, how DID your "oh so brilliant scientist" mind miss that one? And while we are on it, do YOU think scientists who allow themselves to be exploited for political gain are DESERVING of respect? Really? Because I don't. Thank God that fortunately for science itself, that isn't the bulk of them. But for those who allow their political exploitation, conspire with it and profit from it -I wouldn't respect such people no matter what their careers happened to be. What's to respect about that?
You gave a link in a post to scientific papers, saying none showed any political statements. So what? The political exploitation by cooperating scientists wouldn't include any political statements in any of their papers, would it? Their part of the exploitation involves the manipulation of what THEY do -science. So I would expect to find very conveniently packaged "science" to support their political partners. And if you think that hasn't happened -then you are truly ignorant of history, including recent history. It HAPPENS -again, fortunately most scientists have a hell of a lot more integrity than that. But the notion they all do without exception is ridiculous. Less than honest, less than truthful, less than morally upright individuals exist in all fields -including science. If you want to deny that, then again, you are relying upon your own arrogance and not facts to even believe such a dumb thing.
I have a sister who is a microbiologist and while I love her dearly and she is my best friend, I am not under any illusion that merely being one has endowed her with any godlike qualities, it has not given her work one speck of godlike infallibility, it has not given her any "noble-like" crap that puts her above all others. I don't worship at the altar of her work. Scientists are just people who managed to find a job too -a job that makes them no better and no worse than anyone else -and neither is the quality of their work which includes the entire range from excellent to a pile of shit just like every other field of work on the planet! A microbiologist's opinion on an issue outside their field of work -like global warming -doesn't have any more weight than that of anyone else. It is outside their field of expertise. When people throw up statistics about how many and what percentage of scientists outside the field believe about global warming, evolution or any other scientific theory -it is totally irrelevant. It is offered up as if proof of the correctness of the theory -is that how YOUR "scientific" mind actually works? Scientific truth is not determined by a consensus or popularity contest. At times in history NOT ONE PERSON was right and at times thousands had it all wrong and only one person had it right. So let's stop the pretense that scientists hold truth by merely proposing a theory when that theory is to lay the groundwork for further investigation -not the end result!
Those who politically exploit science and those scientists who cooperate with it and join in -are in fact saying the theory itself is the end result and therefore "fact" -and it is a MONSTROUS LIE.
Science never requires our FAITH that it got it right -it must prove it to be right. Only religion requires faith -science NEVER. So I take issue with those who insist we treat scientists like gods -and the arrogant scientists who think they are -and take whatever their theory du jour happens to be as if it were proven fact when it by definition is NOT. As I said -fortunately for science itself, the majority of scientists do not fall among this small group.
But in my original post, my condescension was for those who believe the real role of scientists is their exploitation for political gain -in particular, liberals. So ...since you objected to my comments abut that, you think that is the proper role of scientists and science in society?????
I made several points using historical facts about the misuse of science and the political exploitation of scientists that resulted in causing great harm to millions. ACCURATE ones I might add -one of historic fact. Since I was discussing the misuse of science, then there are no historic examples of that occurring that are suddenly "off limits" or socially inappropriate to use as if it is a social faux pas like farting public or being caught picking your nose.
I pointed out the Soviet example of the political exploitation of science and I pointed out -ACCURATELY -that the Nazi justification for even conceiving the Holocaust was based on the scientific theory of eugenics. Perhaps your "brilliant" scientific mind did not realize this -but this is not a comparison, but a historic fact that perfectly exemplified the dangers of allowing the political exploitation of science. A pretty significant one by any measure. It was NOT a comment comparing scientists or anyone else to Nazis or Hitler. So I guess you have to be a "brilliant" scientist to see a comparison in there that didn't exist. I also pointed out the fact these were all done by leftists -and they were. Just because liberals would like to sweep that under the rug, all comments referencing historical facts about what the Nazis did -aren't comments trying to compare them to someone else. Just because you can't deal with honest assessments of historical facts and importance and think lobbing out a really, really stupid comment that doesn't apply in the least like "Godwin's Law" -doesn't mean no one else is able to discuss what Nazis used to justify their concept of the Holocaust and the extermination of society's "undesirables". That they did it and the grounds they used to rationalize it is a matter of HISTORY and a major example of exactly what I was talking about, isn't it? It is NOT something for you to go into a faux hissy fit as if because it involves Nazis who did it, it automatically means it is off limits as a discussion of how science and scientists were politically exploited in the past.
Again, the political exploitation for the purpose of gaining and expanding their power -is and always has been done by leftists and liberals. The same people who demand we all bow down and worship at the altar of science as if whatever theory they suddenly believe can be exploited for political gain must automatically be treated as "proven fact" and the end product of scientific discovery -when in fact a theory is only the groundwork for further investigation. An investigation that is highly likely to result in tossing the theory out -because that is the nature of scientific progress. The vast majority of all scientific theories as a result are wrong -but it is the process of weeding them out and finding the gem that remains that has and always will result in moving our understanding and knowledge of the natural world forward. No scientist has ever gotten it 100% correct right off the bat and you know you are being exploited when suddenly those who are not scientists but political activists, insist those scientists who would challenge that theory be punished for it as the new "heretics" deserving of being burned at the stake. Challenging that theory and trying to prove it incorrect -is how scientists end up proving any theory correct.
Seriously. Get over yourself -everyone else has.
Look at all the impotent rage.
Rage? Your comments are getting kind of bizarre now and make increasingly less sense. Can you really not read with comprehension and can only see what you wish were true instead of reality?
Simply saying something is false doesn't make it so. You were arguing to me that I was making historically inaccurate statements -but that just doesn't make it so. These are historical facts. You just don't like what it implies about the exploitation of science by political activists when that exploitation isn't something new. Too bad. History is what it is and it is never politically correct. Did you really not know they have entire classes on this in colleges and universities? You claim to be a scientist -but frankly, you totally lack the critical thinking skills of one so I don't find that credible at all and believe it's just one of those anonymous blowhard "I can be whatever I want when I'm online" bullshit claims. Yeah, yeah and I'm next in line for the British throne. I've gotten into discussions with real scientists -and they actually know how to engage in reasoned argument and debate -it takes more than denying something is true. If you really were a scientist then you would know if you are going to insist something isn't true, it is incumbent upon to provide the factual proof of that. Not just toss out your OPINION about it and not just insist it isn't true -which sounds suspicously like "it can't be true!".
No logic, no reason, no critical thinking skills, no rational thought present in one thing you have written in this thread. Instead you are doing the typical ploy of someone intent on AVOIDING debate by resorting to nothing but childish namecalling and making unfounded and unsupported statements. In other words -your posts are completely useless to this entire thread. Run along and play now.
Creation Science and see how many scientists support creationism.
What the fuck is "creation science"?
The number of "scientists" who believe that are so minscule they can be ignored. In fact, the most notable of them, like Kent Hovind, aren't even scientists. They are propagandists.
Maybe you never even knew the thing you think has left you.......
Isn't Hovind in jail for something?
Creation Science and see how many scientists support creationism.
What the fuck is "creation science"?
The number of "scientists" who believe that are so minscule they can be ignored. In fact, the most notable of them, like Kent Hovind, aren't even scientists. They are propagandists.
Maybe you never even knew the thing you think has left you.......
Hovind! I love that guy. I was first introduced to him by a makeshift CD stand in a gas station in Inbred, Mississippi. Listened to him for hours, laughing my ass off.
Also found out his degree is a crock of shit, its from "Patriot Bible University" - which isn't accredited. He was also busted for tax evasion - GO FIGURE.
As a scientist myself, I'm slightly disgusted by the overall negative tone of several members towards the scientific community. Insinuating that all scientific progress in the past few years has been the result of greedy scientists looking for a cheap way to pocket as much money as they can from whatever political party can gain leverage over their wallet.
I would like you all to take a look at a site I will link for a while. I want you to see what you are accusing before you continue to spout your political propaganda in your crusade against what you perceive threatens your world view. (science)
arxiv.org
I dare you to go through this massive database of research papers and find a single instance of a politically biased paper.
"Creation Science" is a word that you can type into Google to get the results. You can type something else if that bothers you.
If you had done that you would find that there are mopre than one or two. Personally i believe that creation is a myth completely, but that isn't the point. the point is that scientists are for sale, not all of them but many are.
Look at all the impotent rage.
