Poll: Science & evidence-based research are correct we are harming Earth ?

[ProudModerate2]

Earth Day. April 22nd.

March for Science: Worldwide protests begin to support 'evidence.'

Crowds of people are marching Saturday in the United States and around the world in support of science and evidence-based research in a protest fueled by opposition to President Donald Trump's environmental and energy policies.

Besides the main march in Washington, organizers said more than 600 "satellite" marches were due to take place globally in a protest timed to coincide with Earth Day.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/22/health/global-march-for-science/index.html

Vote and discuss.

[Ronnie]

I've been watching Democracy Now's coverage of the event, and have been enjoying it quite a bit.  I'm really glad people are organizing against the anti-science ethos of the Trump administration.

[The_Doctor]

Anyone who believes climate change is fictitious is a giant and deeply deluded idiot or bought by the energy lobby

[Horus]

Anyone who believes climate change is fictitious is a giant and deeply deluded idiot or bought by the energy lobby

[ProudModerate2]

[The Other Castro]

Well technically we're changing the Earth. The Earth is fine and doesn't care whether it's warmer or less hospitable. The things that live on the Earth do, so we're mainly screwing ourselves and other things here with us.

[vote for pedro]

Anyone who believes climate change is fictitious is a giant and deeply deluded idiot or bought by the energy lobby

And anyone who believes there is an evil lobby behind the other side of the debate but not their own side is a giant and deeply deluded idiot.

There are giant lobbies behind both sides and those who stand to profit greatly from whatever legislation is passed or struck down.  There is plenty of ignoring whatever data doesn't support the desired conclusion on both sides.  Just like every other political debate.

Yes climate change is occurring, and yes reducing greenhouse gas emissions will reduce the man-made impact on climate change.  Everything beyond that is pretty shaky.

[Maxwell]

Sceince Priebus has been a solid chief of staff!

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Yes climate change is occurring, and yes reducing greenhouse gas emissions will reduce the man-made impact on climate change.  Everything beyond that is pretty shaky.

That ought to be enough.

[Technocracy Timmy]

Yes climate change is occurring, and yes reducing greenhouse gas emissions will reduce the man-made impact on climate change.  Everything beyond that is pretty shaky.

That ought to be enough.

Nah let's just wing it and see what happens. That strategy works stunningly well with our political system.

[mencken]

Science is a process, not a conclusion; a process geared toward looking for evidence that contradicts your pet hypothesis. Even asking the question "Is science right or wrong?" reveal the questioner to be scientifically illiterate.

[pbrower2a]

If we aren't hurting the Earth, then we are certainly hurting ourselves.

By attacking science we are denying ourselves some of the means of meeting problems that we already have and potentially denying ourselves the fruits of scientific inquiry.   

[Ronnie]

Is anyone surprised that Breitbart would post anti-intellectual garbage in response to the march?

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/22/armstrong-green-march-science-mean-science/
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/04/22/thousands-brave-l-a-heat-wave-to-march-for-science/

[Meclazine for Israel]

Science is a process, not a conclusion; a process geared toward looking for evidence that contradicts your pet hypothesis. Even asking the question "Is science right or wrong?" reveal the questioner to be scientifically illiterate.

He just needs to put the word "the" in front of science.

Is THE Process right or wrong?

Is THE Science right or wrong?

I agree with what you are saying.

[The_Doctor]

Anyone who believes climate change is fictitious is a giant and deeply deluded idiot or bought by the energy lobby

And anyone who believes there is an evil lobby behind the other side of the debate but not their own side is a giant and deeply deluded idiot.

There are giant lobbies behind both sides and those who stand to profit greatly from whatever legislation is passed or struck down.  There is plenty of ignoring whatever data doesn't support the desired conclusion on both sides.  Just like every other political debate.

Yes climate change is occurring, and yes reducing greenhouse gas emissions will reduce the man-made impact on climate change.  Everything beyond that is pretty shaky

Reality is that one industry will kill us all if left unchecked. That's the oil and gas industry.  The other won't. That's the fundamental difference. Evil is a relative term in this context. That's your reality and you can split hair and whatever you want but that's your ballgame here. Don't try to say “But both sides are horrible!”

Did I mention the oil and gas industry has for decades tried to suppress and distort the climate change science so that their bottom line would remain unaffected, like the tobacco industry? Can't imagine why.

The fascinating thing is that none of the right wingers want to dispute the essential point. Funnily enough now its about hiding behind the “scientific process.”

I do like how the anti climate change science people have moved onto claiming equivalence between the two sides here. It's hilarious and demonstrative of the ideological blinkers by the anti-climate change science Right on this issue.

[longtimelurker]

Is anyone surprised that Breitbart would post anti-intellectual garbage in response to the march?

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/22/armstrong-green-march-science-mean-science/
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/04/22/thousands-brave-l-a-heat-wave-to-march-for-science/

I participated in the March for Science in Los Angeles earlier today.  The second article says:

"It was 85 degrees in downtown Los Angeles on Saturday, but thousands skipped a trip to the beach or the mountains and instead dragged themselves along a mile-long route to listen to a few celebrity pseudo-scientists and activists to drone on about climate change."

Excuse my shouting, but CELEBRITY PSEUDOSCIENTISTS?  I, and thousands of other attendees, heard the following SCIENTISTS speak:

Seismologist Dr. Lucy Jones, is a PSEUODOSCIENTIST?  She is one of the most esteemed experts on earthquakes in the world.  Dr. Farisa Morales is an an eminent physicist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory.  Dr. Diane Tanaka Diane Tanaka, MD is the Medical Director of the Teenage and Young Adult Health Center at the Division of Adolescent and Young Adult Medicine at the Chldren's Hospital of Los Angeles.

As a PhD geologist, I can confirm what most of the people here have suspected.  BREITBART PRINTS LIES.  VERY BIG LIES.  And they know that they are lying.  Sorry for the caps, but right now I feel personally insulted by that website.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Options 1 and 3 (normal)

[pbrower2a]

Is anyone surprised that Breitbart would post anti-intellectual garbage in response to the march?

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/04/22/armstrong-green-march-science-mean-science/
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/04/22/thousands-brave-l-a-heat-wave-to-march-for-science/

Of course we know by now what the 'scientific' view of economic reality is according to the Trump Administration: economic 'progress' is nothing more than the enrichment of the Right People irrespective of the hardships that other must endure.

That's what feudal lords, antebellum planters, mobsters, and kleptocrats believe.

[Anti-Bothsidesism]

Options 1 and 3 (normal)