March for Science

So do it and quit your bitching.

Last I heard no one was putting guns to your heads to be taxpayer-funded leeches. Go do something that someone not on the take will pay you for...and spare me the histrionics.

 

Yawn

Nice passive aggressive post mr nye

 

And you found more in a crowd of protesters Or at a global warming protest were science was declared 'settled' Oh and as to they do not know everything that is universal. The worst crowd is probably engineers as they know a lot of tech and frequently have little real world experience.

 

Bzzzzt the manipulated data make it increase. However historical records indicate it has both risen AND fallen repeatedly. Also the models that predicted global warming are now ALL over 3 sigma off. In other words incorrect.

So could solar activity. Oh and CO2 is impacted by volcanic activity also. Ooops and plant life tends to stabalize CO2 by growing more in a higher concentration environment. So is that modeled. Add in that CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas rather than a driver. So in part I will agree 100% that humans impact the climate. However so would a huge herd of Bison like used to dominate the plains. As would forest fires which were more extreme before human management of forests. As would a zillion other things. So the better question is 'does humanity impact the climate enough to destabilize the system in a negative way?' I think the answer is no. Then add in the fact that our ability to 'fix' the impact is almost non existent. Yep look into how much change the draconian changes the overlords want to implement actually achieve.

Study yes. I would like to see a more balanced set though as currently anyone opposing the 'settled' side is attacked. Kind of like was done by the flat earthers.

Very few I have seen do not want it studied. Many do not want to change the entire economy and give up freedom to conform to the vision of people who's studies have largely been disproven by time to the point that they change the name from Global Warming to Climate Change. However I will be more open when the greenies wanting my freedom get off their private jets and yachts. Oh and no more world wide get togethers. All must be done by video conference from here forward. And lastly they need to limit themselves to a single dwelling under 3000 sq ft (above average still). But nope instead they want me to give up my life first for their goal

 

I think everything I've said to this point is still in 100% agreement with what you have stated above...a balanced perspective of needing further research on climate, personal responsibility for our environment, and of course weeding out bad data/researchers.

 

Sure man has an impact on the earth, but not to the extent some of the more extreme environmentalists believe.

From carbon credits to LEED to any other program/certification/targeted research that touts your guilt or greenitude, all are designed to separate you from your green.

 

This is a timely subject. I just finished my final college course, and it was a doozy. As part of my degree, I was required to complete two lab sciences. Well, being 100% online student, my choices were limited. My only available choice this semester was Human Ecology.

While I come down on the side of science, and I tend to believe that humans have had an artificial impact much greater than any other species in earth's history, this course really didn't focus on actual science, and I found that disappointing. Two of our assignments included calculating "our fair share" of carbon (while ignoring the other environmental impacts, like mining for the resources to create hybrid/electric vehicles - for those morally superior in the class that were proud of their mpg) and "how many earths it takes to support our lifestyles" (mine was HUGE because I use airplanes more than once a year). For the purpose of the calculation, an "earth" equated to X percentage of resources consumed, between animals, water, carbon, petroleum, metals, etc.

In my final paper, I had to research Obama's executive orders to create protected ocean areas. Now, I love the ocean. I've long contended that I was born in the wrong place for being someone that likes diving, boating, swimming, etc. as much as I do. But, this whole deal was horseshit. There was no science involved. And this isn't a "fuck Obama" post either - its just a commentary on the situation itself. The statement was made that protecting ocean area in the Atlantic would help with climate change (White House press release), but then there was zero data or even further explanation to support it. They just made the statement and that was that. Then, there was the statement that it was about "conservation". A CEO from a crab company went in front of Congress and read a quote from scientists (the same scientists that supported protecting ocean areas) about the "pristine condition" of those waters. The same waters that had been fished commercially for years. In fact, the US has 8 regional fishing management councils to try and ensure sustainability. He basically said, "if these are pristine waters, then what is this regulation actually saving? We're not overfishing, we already manage it, so back off."

I find it disconcerting that science classes are teaching "feeling" and political agenda over actual science.

 

To me, one of the most outstanding aspects of this "global warming" issue is that we're choosing sides and are ready to fight each other over a scientific issue that is so convoluted, and is being played out over so many hundreds (millions?) of years that even being concerned about it is folly. Most of our present data that has been gathered and is being used to come to this "consensus" that the data is almost useless.

Ocean temperature, for example, up until the last couple of decades was gleaned by dropping a bucket into the water from simple ships traveling the usual ocean routes and then having the temperature measured is beyond ignorant. How many of those thermometers were accurate, how long did the water sit on the deck before the temp was measured, how many of those people taking the sample were even connected to the scientific community, what about the temp in the other 999.999% of the oceans and, finally, how many other unknowns were present. Today we have much more accurate ways to measure things like the water temp and, since we've only had this technology for such a short time, the data that we've gathered is but an infinitesimal amount necessary to make any determination on what the Earth's climate is doing, or is going to do.

And to think that ocean water temp is just a tiny factor of a changing climate it makes anyone that thinks about it wonder why any legitimate climate scientist would actually stick his neck out and make a wild assed guess as to what our present climate situation is or where it's going. Guessing is all that it is.
As slow as the planet climate changes occur it leads many to believe that we will run out of those "evil" fossil fuels before we actually damage anything. Like Lawn Dart said, if we could keep politics out of the scientific world we would be just fine.

 

Bill Nye, the oh how science has changed guy.

 

You will accept the settled facts or else:
http://whnt.com/2017/04/24/multiple-shots-fired-into-uah-building-over-the-weekend/

Oh and Lawn Dart while I understand your point consider the impact Locusts have. Also trees vs grass. Oh wait Bison vs grass and trees. The entire planet effects each other.

 

Funny but I was actually in the Atlanta march via visiting friends. It was more of a political statement from the marchers than making Science awareness. The one good thing I did see was lots of youth involvement (kids ages 8 to 14) and their statements were mostly about advancement of true science rather than political statements about Trump.

 

Start the indoctrination early

 

Is this the new scientific method?

 

Kids in the Soviet Union were taught to spy on their parents, these kids are being taught ersatz science and to be militant with those who disagree.

 

Yep and black masks and bricks are the new civil discussion. This is what you get when a major party is run by a rabble rouser.

 

Are you comparing these kids to the Soviet Russian kids? The ATL kids were just expressing their passion for science. I did not see any indoctrination and while listening to the speeches, only heard expressions for the love of science. Maybe you attended another march for science?

 

If they have a passion for climate "science", then yes. If they believe the earth is in grave danger, then yes.
What exactly were these kids marching for? What did they hope to accomplish?
Did they even know they were there to accomplish something?

 

The indoctrination was the marching.

How about going to a museum instead. Or performing experiments at home? Or even a science club that gets together to do and discuss things. A park for the natural sciences is good also. Some applied science (not engineering that is against the law to say) like building stuff or programming (a skill that is important). Or we could go and goose step around that square

 

You really think you know what these kids believe or think just by looking at a photo. Hyperbole much?

Could the marching also be announcing that these kids believe science is important?