Posted on 04/23/2017 6:28:31 AM PDT by rktman
Are you against government-funded science? If you are, you must be against all science! That's the conclusion of a large number of parasites and freaks who went to giant costume parties all around the world dressed in white coats to give themselves a patina of authority.
Here are some of the dumbest things that were said at those rallies:
Jamie Rappaport Clark, president and CEO of Defenders of Wildlife, [said] Science matters and without science wildlife have no chance for survival...."
Really? How did wildlife survive before there was "science"? Here's what retired astronaut Leland Melvin said:
"...its a beautiful planet, but there are a lot of things going on and without the data and without the science, we are going to decimate our planet and eradicate our civilization"
Without "the science"? Did Melvin call it "the science" when he was at NASA? For a former astronaut, he talks like an 8 year-old. Which brings us to...
Teddy Shipman, an 8-year-old New Yorker in D.C. for the march, stressed the importance of a healthy environment.
Trees make oxygen, Shipman said. It helps us breathe. Who doesnt like that?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Does little Teddy know what keeps trees alive so they can make us oxygen????
The Million Nerd March
the only science they’re familiar with is hooking the shunt up to the national jugular vein. I hope they have a happy May Day
If the Science of Global Warming is Settled, and every scientist agrees, why do they need Hundreds of Billions of Taxpayer Dollars to prove it??
Eliminate taxpayer supported tenure and most of the absurdities will disappear.
And without ‘the science’ we will ‘eradicate civilization.’ Isn’t that what they want?
“Scientists Lives Matter” snort
Global warming is huge money in “science.”
Exactly. Let Bill and Melinda Gates; Case Foundation; Zuckerberg, ad nauseum fund their efforts.
Scientists depend on money from the government to fund their “research”. So they kiss government’s a$$. Explains why there is little true science any more.
He thinks the EPA does it.
I am betting that the majority of those marchers would be stumped by any math higher than gigth grade level.
And they have less than no clue on physics at any level.
Biology? Feddedabowdit.
Heck, most can barely read.
But they know how to use their cell phones while not having a clue about the operation of even the simplest component.
But they want more science.
Gigth = fifth.
Bad iPad, bad iPad.
Science Beggars join the H1-B Visa STEM crowd.
The Science Beggars get NO support,
after they actively voted losers who ruined
SciTechnologyEngineeringMath STEM industries.
What goes around, comes back around. Ouch!
Looking at the bigger picture over just climate science, the US taxpayers have been supporting science, real or imagined, since the second world war. The Manhattan Project, NASA, research universities, and military heaven knows what. Seventy five years of entitlement is a hard mind set to break.
Just look at their ideas on what makes a boy a boy and a girl a girl, and how they believe that it's a choice.
I received emails and letters from a prominent scientific association, inviting me to come join the march. I deleted the emails and threw away the letters, and was rather puzzled why such a prominent organization would participate in such tactics. And by prominent, I mean that it is one of the top organizations in the world; for scientists to get their work published in its journals is a rare honor that few scientists experience in their careers.
I do not like to see science become politicized. When scientists start becoming political, it means that actual science is taking a back seat to ideology. The USSR tried to subjugate science to ideology, with disastrous results that put Russian science far behind the developed world in terms of scientific discovery. Physical law is not political, and the scientists who study it should not be political, either.
I have not seen where President Trump is halting science. His budgets may not direct as much funding towards some areas of science as the budgets of past presidents, but we have to consider this as rational adults. We have a huge national debt, which is depressing our economy. Furthermore, scientific advancement does not have a linear relationship with funding—i.e. throwing ten times more money into science does not result in ten times faster discovery. And in some areas, Trump is actually reversing the policies of Obama. Obama had cut NASA funding off, discontinued the shuttle program, and basically decimated the space program. Trump is turning that around. Why no credit to him for doing that?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.