pirana 0
Recommended Posts
rushmc 23
QuoteQuoteQuoteUnlike Big Tech, which has a record of making campaign contributions mostly to Democrats, Big Science is more evenly divided, Zafarnia told FoxNews.com.
I'm not sure "Big Science" is cohesive enough to warrant the epithet.
Most definitely agree. Big science (if such a thing can even be said to exist) is made up of too many factions that will pursue evidence and the truths behind it to ever behave badly as a whole. I do not see even a simple majority of scientists ignoring solid evidence because it doesn't fit into a politicized agenda.
Essentially, determining facts not only dictates their agenda, it is their agenda. What the rest of Those Darn Humans do with those facts (their application) is simply not the job of science - that's for the technicians and engineers hired by private and public sector business.
Maybe that is what the OP really refers to; the employees of the corporatocracy and bureacracy that actually decide what to do once scientists provide them with information about the natural world.
Exactly
How do you think we got to this AGW bs?
Sure as hell not through pure science
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
Quote>Dont explain shit
You seem really angry and bitter tonight. There's nothing wrong with wanting to keep your job - and it explains your position on things. Lots of people do it, so you're in good company.
Agreed. Indeed, we see both sides with jobs, livelihoods, etc., invested in the debate.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
I have recently considered many of the posts on this forum. There are some favored charities of mine. For example:
(1) The Miami Project
(2) The Muscular Dystrophy Association
(3) The ALS Therapy Institute.
It occurred to me that the government is funding research on the issues of paralysis, MD and Lou Gehrig's disease. Why are these companies funding research when the government is already doing it? Indeed, Harley Davidson has donated over $3 million to help Jerry's kids in 2010.
Harley Davidson is a proponent of two-stroke technology. Obviously, they are positioning their research for some reason or another. Thousands of people have died on Harleys.
Thus, I have decided that the people on here make sense - "Only government funding is legitimate." Therefore, the MDA can go fuck itself. Any cure for Muscular Dystrophy will come from the government. If Merck were to develop an effective treatment or cure I would have to conclude that there's a bad reason behind it and therefore oppose any and all drug therapies available.
I've had a change of heart. Any science not funded by the government should be shut down. The government always is altruistic while private funding is nefarious.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
(1) The Miami Project
(2) The Muscular Dystrophy Association
(3) The ALS Therapy Institute.
It occurred to me that the government is funding research on the issues of paralysis, MD and Lou Gehrig's disease. Why are these companies funding research when the government is already doing it? Indeed, Harley Davidson has donated over $3 million to help Jerry's kids in 2010.
Harley Davidson is a proponent of two-stroke technology. Obviously, they are positioning their research for some reason or another. Thousands of people have died on Harleys.
Thus, I have decided that the people on here make sense - "Only government funding is legitimate." Therefore, the MDA can go fuck itself. Any cure for Muscular Dystrophy will come from the government. If Merck were to develop an effective treatment or cure I would have to conclude that there's a bad reason behind it and therefore oppose any and all drug therapies available.
I've had a change of heart. Any science not funded by the government should be shut down. The government always is altruistic while private funding is nefarious.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Most definitely agree. Big science (if such a thing can even be said to exist) is made up of too many factions that will pursue evidence and the truths behind it to ever behave badly as a whole. I do not see even a simple majority of scientists ignoring solid evidence because it doesn't fit into a politicized agenda.
Essentially, determining facts not only dictates their agenda, it is their agenda. What the rest of Those Darn Humans do with those facts (their application) is simply not the job of science - that's for the technicians and engineers hired by private and public sector business.
Maybe that is what the OP really refers to; the employees of the corporatocracy and bureacracy that actually decide what to do once scientists provide them with information about the natural world.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites