It is the in conservative playbook to erode public confidence in the scientific community.
Bad for profits.
Must destroy.
The Scientific Community continues to erode their reputations.
- Thread starter coloradonoles
- Start date
Bad for profits.
Must destroy.
What's your profession and area of study in college?
Again, just trying to determine your credibility.
Can she bake a cherry pie, Billy boy, Billy boy? Can she bake a cherry pie, charming Billy?
Answer, child.
They'll probe and prod and look for any reason to disqualify me. They'll do anything but deal with my arguments and/or stated positions directly.
Pretty much. Perhaps you should stick to the wouldja threads.
Perhaps. You and Billy are to thought provoking for silly me. Follow the path, the reward awaits you.
You're not singular in this regard on HROT. Intellectual incuriousity is rampant on here.
If that's the case you should check out 4chan, r/the_Donald, and r/incel.
Have you ever heard of infowars? You'll love this guy, loads of wit, similar politics, his name is Alexander Jones. Enjoy.
Check em out if you ever feel lonely. That's seems to be why lots of them are there.
Don't think of it as a message board, think of it as a community of like minded people. Same with infowars, you'll love Mr. Jones.
When has reality ever been an issue? Pretend it isn't, declare that it's a fake message board. BAU.
Yeah, with a heavy emphasis on manipulation, deception, greed, and self preservation. Humans are so wonderful
And THERE'S the randman1 we all know and laugh at. This is the guy who would argue with physicists that the universe was created 6,000 to 10,000 years ago.
That doesn't began even remotely to address the deep damn hole you dug for yourself. You're so big on addressing the content of the post - why don't you practice what you preach? Here you go:
This is Scientific American a publication that has 3.5 Million subscribers at $34.99 and it is the oldest continuously published monthly magazine in the United States. Not your average rag paper. It has an incredibly high Impact Factor (if you believe in those).
It is better if every scientific organization remain non-political. Does that mean that every person has to put their biases away, ideally yes, but that is unrealistic. But an official statement backing one side vs another is terrible no matter what the opinion is.
Trumpanzee literacy tops out at Beverly Cleary novels. And even those are for your top 1%.
It is better if every scientific organization remain non-political? Why? There is a f'n idiot in the WH spewing anti-science stupidity. Who is doing serious damage to the scientific infrastructure of this country. Who is pursuing anti-scientific policies that are killing tens of thousands of people unnecessarily. That science organizations remain silent would be a crime against humanity. It's like telling religious organizations to remain silent while millions of Jews are rounded up and shipped off to concentration camps. To their ever-lasting shame...most did.
