Leftists And Scientists Are Marching For Something Or Other
< < Go Back
There’s a big march on Washington, which has spread out to being a march around the world. It’s not important enough for the NY Times, LA Times, or Washington Post to cover (other than a traffic story in the WP). A few other sites are pimping it, such as ABC News.
Basing the march on an unhinged anti-Trump march, featuring all the Usual Unhinged Moonbat Leftist social justice warrior garbage is probably not the best thing.
The march puts scientists, who generally shy away from advocacy and whose work depends on objective experimentation, into a more public position.
Really? Shy away? The climastrologists are constantly yelling in public about uber-doom.
Objective experimentation? They rely on ginned up data, failed computer models, and essentially reading tea leaves to tell us future doom.
Scientists involved in the march said they are anxious about political and public rejection of established science such as climate change and the safety of vaccines.
And there will be lots of pussy hats and angry anti-Trump signs.
Is the March to solve a problem or create one?
The March seems to be fighting strawmen. It is supposedly about “Encouraging scientists to share their research” (as if scientists like to hide their research). We know they hide their data, their methods and their adjustments, but when the ABC turns up to interview them, they don’t seem to hide their opinions. They hide their declines but don’t hide their Nobel Prizes (even if they didn’t get them). Do they need encouragement?
And the March is there, apparently, “affirming science as a vital feature of a working democracy”, who says it isn’t? Like voters have been asking for witchdoctors instead? Absolutely no one is questioning science’s role in democracy. Science has such an incredible halo, it is considered to be so-above-question that everyone wants to brand their version of reality as “science”. There are no marches for stone-age solutions, no “anti-science” movements (except inadvertently by those who think models produce evidence). But those who falsely cloak themselves in the science flag want us to think there is an anti-science movement, so this feeds their own comfortable delusion.
There is major muddying going on here
What does it mean to “advocate for open and accessible science?” . These are the same people who fight to the death to prevent heretics from publishing a paper, or from doing a radio interview, or from opening a research centre. The point of including statements like that is to blur the reality for onlookers and fool the puppet marchers. It’s just more “fog”.
More From RightWingNews:
Rss Feed