March for Marxism (Science)

[Rorschach]

LOL, JS is a rusted-on joke.... all he does is regurgitate the GRALP propaganda...
Obviously he can't think for himself and all hes good for is insulting those who disagree with him...
Unlike you JS I can see both sides of the argument and I know enough to see when one side or the other is wrong or lying.... YOU on the other hand being rusted-on can only regurgitate what the ALP tell you to.
LW Progs cannot tolerate dissent and always make personal attacks like all good TROLLS do.

If you cannot discern that this march was more political than about actual science you prove all the above correct about you.

[Rorschach]

Funny how this started as an anti-Trump position... and funny that all the liberals including liberal scientists jumped aboard.

Criticism

A number of scientists voiced concerns over the march. Sylvester James Gates warned that "such a politically charged event might send a message to the public that scientists are driven by ideology more than by evidence". Climate change skeptic William Happer stated that "there's no reason to assume the president is against science" while regarding the march. Writing in the New York Times, Robert S. Young argued that the march will "reinforce the narrative from skeptical conservatives that scientists are an interest group and politicize their data, research and findings for their own ends" and that it would be better for scientists to "march into local civic groups, churches, county fairs and, privately, into the offices of elected officials."

Responding to criticism surrounding the political nature of the march, meteorologist and columnist Eric Holthaus wrote that the scientific field "has always been political" and referred to the example of Galileo Galilei's confrontation with the political order. Holthaus wrote that the scientists must also protest when "truth itself is being called into question".

San Francisco Lead Organizer Kristen Ratan debated Jerry Coyne on KQED's Forum regarding his criticism of the March and remarked that the millennial generation is just finding its feet with regard to activism and should be encouraged. Ratan also distinguished between being political and being partisan and suggested that while the March for Science is a political act, it is by no means partisan, which implies blind allegiance to one party over another. Ratan reiterated that the March For Science supports evidence-based policy-making regardless of party or affiliation.

Oh dear the Lead Organiser says it is a POLITICAL ACT....
I rest my case JS.... best you run back to the ALP and get another gob full of propaganda to spout.

[J o h n S m i t h]

LOL, JS is a rusted-on joke.... all he does is regurgitate the GRALP propaganda...
Obviously he can't think for himself and all hes good for is insulting those who disagree with him...
Unlike you JS I can see both sides of the argument and I know enough to see when one side or the other is wrong or lying.... YOU on the other hand being rusted-on can only regurgitate what the ALP tell you to.
LW Progs cannot tolerate dissent and always make personal attacks like all good TROLLS do.

If you cannot discern that this march was more political than about actual science you prove all the above correct about you.

so now you've taken to replacing debate with hysterics? Let me know how that works for you since your debating hasn't gone very well

I rest my case JS....

you don't even know what your case is, let alone when to rest it.

[Rorschach]

Got nothing as usual eh....
How unusual for you..... keep trolling.... its all you are really good at.

[J o h n S m i t h]

Got nothing as usual eh....

what did I need 'something' for? You think your hysterics deserves a thought out reply Goose? You must be kidding

[Rorschach]

One more time for the idiot TROLL who has reading problems....

Funny how this started as an anti-Trump position... and funny that all the liberals including liberal scientists jumped aboard.

Criticism

A number of scientists voiced concerns over the march. Sylvester James Gates warned that "such a politically charged event might send a message to the public that scientists are driven by ideology more than by evidence". Climate change skeptic William Happer stated that "there's no reason to assume the president is against science" while regarding the march. Writing in the New York Times, Robert S. Young argued that the march will "reinforce the narrative from skeptical conservatives that scientists are an interest group and politicize their data, research and findings for their own ends" and that it would be better for scientists to "march into local civic groups, churches, county fairs and, privately, into the offices of elected officials."

Responding to criticism surrounding the political nature of the march, meteorologist and columnist Eric Holthaus wrote that the scientific field "has always been political" and referred to the example of Galileo Galilei's confrontation with the political order. Holthaus wrote that the scientists must also protest when "truth itself is being called into question".

San Francisco Lead Organizer Kristen Ratan debated Jerry Coyne on KQED's Forum regarding his criticism of the March and remarked that the millennial generation is just finding its feet with regard to activism and should be encouraged. Ratan also distinguished between being political and being partisan and suggested that while the March for Science is a political act, it is by no means partisan, which implies blind allegiance to one party over another. Ratan reiterated that the March For Science supports evidence-based policy-making regardless of party or affiliation.

Oh dear the Lead Organiser says it is a POLITICAL ACT....
I rest my case JS.... best you run back to the ALP and get another gob full of propaganda to spout.

[J o h n S m i t h]

One more time for the idiot TROLL who has reading problems....

Funny how this started as an anti-Trump position... and funny that all the liberals including liberal scientists jumped aboard.

Criticism

A number of scientists voiced concerns over the march. Sylvester James Gates warned that "such a politically charged event might send a message to the public that scientists are driven by ideology more than by evidence". Climate change skeptic William Happer stated that "there's no reason to assume the president is against science" while regarding the march. Writing in the New York Times, Robert S. Young argued that the march will "reinforce the narrative from skeptical conservatives that scientists are an interest group and politicize their data, research and findings for their own ends" and that it would be better for scientists to "march into local civic groups, churches, county fairs and, privately, into the offices of elected officials."

Responding to criticism surrounding the political nature of the march, meteorologist and columnist Eric Holthaus wrote that the scientific field "has always been political" and referred to the example of Galileo Galilei's confrontation with the political order. Holthaus wrote that the scientists must also protest when "truth itself is being called into question".

San Francisco Lead Organizer Kristen Ratan debated Jerry Coyne on KQED's Forum regarding his criticism of the March and remarked that the millennial generation is just finding its feet with regard to activism and should be encouraged. Ratan also distinguished between being political and being partisan and suggested that while the March for Science is a political act, it is by no means partisan, which implies blind allegiance to one party over another. Ratan reiterated that the March For Science supports evidence-based policy-making regardless of party or affiliation.

Oh dear the Lead Organiser says it is a POLITICAL ACT....
I rest my case JS.... best you run back to the ALP and get another gob full of propaganda to spout.

why are repeating the same dumb comment? I haven't even commented on the march you fkken idiot
See, I told you you didn't even know what case you were arguing.

[Black Orchid]

Take the hysterics to Sparta please

[Rorschach]

I posted factual comments JS from fellow scientists.... debate them or accept them...
You are the only one being hysterical here.

[J o h n S m i t h]

I posted factual comments JS from fellow scientists.... debate them or accept them...
You are the only one being hysterical here.

wrong goose . You see you are the hysterical one.
i've bad news for you dopey. I don't need to neither debate nor accept it.

Why you keep thinking I care about your issues is beyond me. I don't.

Now, Is that simple enough for you to understand now?