From Vox
Stream: March For Science A Dud.
(Note: Our series with the good saint Thomas Aquinas will return next Sunday. This current post will remain on top through Sunday: watch for updates.)
I am pleased to report the asinine March “for” “Science” has been a dud.
Organizers lit the fuse of what they thought was going to be an enormous stick of dynamite. Wait until you hear the boom, honey! But what they got was tiny pop from a damp ladyfinger.
Pop. No exclamation mark.
The Independent quoted some guy called Peter Lipke, who said, “I’m a science professor.” This prepped the reader, signalling some solid science was on its way. Lipke continued, “The current administration has shown complete disregard for facts and the truth.”
[…]The insufferable and ever-smug Vox began its “explanation” of the March with a picture of a kid, maybe eight or so, holding the sign, “Climate change is real”.
[…]In the same Vox picture, a plain-looking woman is holding the sign, “Your global warming can’t melt this Snowflake.”
She’s right, you know. Given global-warming-of-doom has failed to materialize as predicted (over and over and over again), very few snowflakes are being melted.
Vox never disappoints. They checked the “fatuous” box by quoting a sociologist who “studies protest movements”, and she said—are you ready for more science?—“Protest is also an opportunity to create what we call ‘collective identity.'”
Who knew? I mean, who knew scientists were so smart?
[…]Time magazine kindly supplied a video of high-pitched, ear-grating woo-wooing protesters (I still say the DOD was wrong to reject my proposal to weaponize the female protester voice). One guy held the sign, “Climate change cannot be undone by tweeting.” But it can be by holding up an idiotic sign?
[…]In one of the satellite marches in Los Angeles, a good handful of people showed up, one carrying the sign, “Make wind, not warming.” Flatulence jokes in a science march? Where’s the respect?
[…]Australia. “I create knowledge. What’s your superpower”. Sarcasm.
[…]
Science wants you—no: Science demands—you click over and read the rest. You don’t want to an anti-Science, do you?
Updates
More than one person had a sign or that read “Science is not a liberal conspiracy.” Yeah? What would make people think it was? Maybe all those liberal political signs? Like the one with a picture of Hillary which read, “She probably would have blinded me with Science.” No, that would have been the bursts of EM from the atomic bombs.
Science does not yet have an explanation why this lady has so many teeth.
Tweet: “That millions feel they must march to show solidarity with the truth, reason and evidence is not particularly reassuring.” No, it isn’t. How could these marchers have been so easily fooled?
An ugly woman with, “My science prevents STDs when grabbing p***y”. Chastity does even better.
Heard often: “What do we want? Evidence-based results! When do we want it? After peer review.” Oh, Lord. Peer review. The best guarantor of conformity and groupthink. And this march proves it.
Sign (and not the only one): “No science no beer.” Dude? Science is not responsible for beer.
Nye angry. Nye no like people not love science. Arrugah!
'Without science it's just fiction': March for Science https://t.co/Pbrqa93YOp via @nbcnews
— GregoryAllenPhillips (@3TilMidnight) April 23, 2017
Will somebody get this man a cookie?
Number of people holding up that idiotic, scidolatry Neil DeGrasse Tyson slogan can’t be counted.
Truly, Science is a religion. What else accounts for all this kiddies?
Here’s some real science for you.
Note the Hulk. Or note this one, complete with “Black Lives Matter” science poster. Or something.
March for Science South Bend, IN #sciencemarchsb pic.twitter.com/8bOXUo4SNK
— indybend (@indybend) April 23, 2017
More real Science.
Spent the afternoon at the March for Science in San Jose, really good speeches! #MarchforScience pic.twitter.com/FG9V60eO9F
— Jason Molenda (@jasonmolenda) April 23, 2017
Taste this: “We must speak for the trees for the trees have no tongues.”
April 22, 2017 at 10:31 pm
Okay, first, I’m embarrassed by the “South Bend, IN” photo. I went to college there (more or less), and would like more sense to come out of the area.
Second, are there really people who don’t understand that scientists respond to incentives?
I kid, of course – if the incentives led scientists to produce results that didn’t support these folks’ favored policies, they’d understand it just fine.
April 22, 2017 at 11:36 pm
Trigger warning:
ladyfingers ?
April 23, 2017 at 12:01 am
Ladyfingers: 1/2 inch long, very low power firecrackers.
April 23, 2017 at 12:09 am
Meanwhile, states are getting back into the business of sneaking creationism into science classes, the Trump administration and GOP Hill are gutting environmental protections, and use poor coal miners as political pawns in an utterly anti-scientific, anti-economic-reality propaganda campaign…
Yeah! You must be so pleased!
JMJ