Scientists’ March on Washington

[Slybak]

https://twitter.com/ScienceMarchDC/s...22044422717442


Well, that went to shit pretty fast.

Yeah. If its one thing scientists are not known for, its accepting a theoretical framework based upon the observation of dependent variables.

[Garnier Fructis]

It's coming, I think, from the fact that even a strong communicator in science has to use some jargon and some people simply can't or won't be bothered to understand it. While having clarity is important, I can't be clear about the work I've done if I don't start out by getting a layperson on the same page with regard to some basic immunological terms like "cytokines"; this looks opaque to the uninterested (which I'd wager include Tota), so they shut down and claim that it's the scientist's fault for not communicating clearly.

This is the direction I was trying to steer towards before(or while?) I made a total ass of myself.

Another aspect that adds to the problem is that scientists aren't using technical language amongst themselves to exclude people; it's so that they can be understood unambiguously by other scientists (as much as possible, anyway). That's the great irony of the whole thing: language designed for clarity and compactness is consequently unintelligible to everyone else.

Feynman gave a few good reasons for it.

You could say he had some... Feyn reasons.

[Kiri]

That's like every president in every country in the entire history of presidency.
The difference with Trump - he's honest about it That's why he got the votes. He just went - "look at me I'm a pathological liar and I don't give a fuck" - and people were like - "At least he's honest about it, unlike certain other candidate"

Sadly, yeah. For some reason, people seem have switched from 'at least honest about his lying' to 'honest all the time' by now, which is even worse. At least the core voters.

[Rooflesstoofless]

What are these marches hoping to accomplish?

Losing their virginity.

[Guran]

That's like every president in every country in the entire history of presidency.
The difference with Trump - he's honest about it That's why he got the votes. He just went - "look at me I'm a pathological liar and I don't give a fuck" - and people were like - "At least he's honest about it, unlike certain other candidate"

Considering your sig, here's an analogy on how wrong that statement is:
The Borg never hid the fact they want to assimilate you, so they can't be that bad, right?
WRONG!! Being honest about being evil(*) does not make that person any less evil. In fact, atleast the person lying about it can be held accountable for what they said and occasionally being forced to do the 'right' thing because they promised it and fear repurcusions. The ENTIRE point of checks and balances is so that those liars can be reprimanded. Voting for someone that openly admits he's a lying turnip does NOT make him accountable for the evil things he does, because you voted TO BE LIED TO ANY WHICH WAY HE DAMN WELL PLEASES.
Chosing the evil candidate because you KNOW he'll be evil over the candidate that MIGHT be evil because you don't know how it'll turn out is, in my honest opinion, a) a very pessimistic view and clear show of fear of the unknown AKA xenophobia and b) so dumb that the rest of the nation and humanity should be protected from this self-destructive behaviour by taking away your right to vote.

(*)I took the liberty of assuming you would find any politician with a pure selfish interest evil, for the sake of simple communication.

PS: If he's so honest about it, why didn't he release his tax returns? The only honest thing we know he ever said was that he is a liar, anything beyond that is refuted or diminished by his own words.

Edit: My post seemed a bit agressive in hindsight, so here is a clarification: It's not that I'm angry with people voting for Trump, at most I'm angry at the reasoning as to why they voted. Mostly though, I'm dissappointed, worried and a bit scared for the rest of the human race. Especially because often when Trump does something I get a deja-vu to stories of my grandfather, a working class German who saw a demagogue rise to power and destroy his nation. It was only afterwards that he gained new information about what was going on at the time and how much he was lied to. And I am so scared to see history repeat itself, because I had hoped that after 80 years such a mistake would not have been forgotten yet.
If you like to know more about demagogues, you could start with the wiki page on it. Plenty of examples of demagogues in the US as well in the source links.

[Spectral]

Don't gag order their research, and they wont have cause to march. simple. Gag ordering is against the very principle of knowledge exchange that is essential for science.

I think we're going to need to be a lot more clear about what's meant by "gag order". To the best of my knowledge, no one is being prevented from publishing their research. There are temporary restrictions on what sorts of public statements about policy changes are coming; given administrative transition, this is a reasonable restriction. If I've missassessed the actual current policy, I'm happy to revise my view based on a citation that this isn't what's going on.

There's some precedent for actual repression of scientists speaking as happened in the Bush administration, but I'll withhold judgment on what will happen here. As near as I can tell, all that's really being restricted at the moment is scientists talking to the media about internal administrative policies.

- - - Updated - - -

Then that's on the working/middle class for being so petty. They're not actually "for science" if they can't distinguish between the two groups because of their own bias. And scientists aren't protesting losing money they're protesting the embracing of willful ignorance.

I don't see how it's on laypeople. I'd put any blame for the problem @Tram identifies as squarely on the organizes that insist on injecting "intersectionality" (see earlier linked tweets) into a march that's ostensibly about science. By doing this, they're injecting an ideology that many rightfully see as extreme and an ideology that has nothing to do with science into their march and then hiding behind "we're just promoting science, opposing us is opposing science". This is a classic motte-and-bailey tactic of taking a very popular, respected position/institution (scientists are highly respected, right in between doctors and firefighters in popularity), smuggling in a bunch of other views, then claiming that the opposition hates the popular thing if they disagree with you.

Of course, the blame for this doesn't fall on scientists more broadly - it falls on the people organizing the event. The advice from Science magazine here is good; make this about the science, embrace as many people as possible in that tent, and settle down the radicalism for a bit to focus on the specific cause you're promoting there. If they can't do that and insist on promoting "intersectionalism" and other orthogonal issues, they alienate natural allies like me.

[THE Bigzoman]

"Intersectionality".

Oh, those kinds of "scientists".

So a scientist march with few scientists participating?

[Spectral]

So a scientist march with few scientists participating?

To be fair, there are a non-trivial number of scientists that hold pretty radical views about these sorts of things, especially in very left-wing cities where that's the normal local culture. I personally know people who would be aghast at the suggestion that affirmative action isn't actually an important part of promoting science.

[THE Bigzoman]

To be fair, there are a non-trivial number of scientists that hold pretty radical views about these sorts of things, especially in very left-wing cities where that's the normal local culture. I personally know people who would be aghast at the suggestion that affirmative action isn't actually an important part of promoting science.

That's sad.

With that said though, i'm going to laugh my ass off when I see a tweet, sign, or video, of a scientist talking about how god awful GMOs are.

[Aeriedk]

What are these marches hoping to accomplish?

Right now. Awareness about their cause. However, the fact is the government is currently controlled by the GOP and they know that these scientist marching on Washington are not their base and will make little note of their presence.

Sadly in today's age of American politics your protest is either too passive or too radical...there is never a sweet spot that gets law makers from across the aisle to listen.

[Dextroden]

To be fair, there are a non-trivial number of scientists that hold pretty radical views about these sorts of things, especially in very left-wing cities where that's the normal local culture. I personally know people who would be aghast at the suggestion that affirmative action isn't actually an important part of promoting science.

What. How. Why.

Who are these people?

[Spectral]

Browsing their Facebook page, things are mostly looking pretty good. Lots of direct, specific science advocacy. The most upvoted comments are mostly things that pretty much anyone that cares about science can get behind. While there are inherent partisan undertones resultant from the current administration being Republican, this mostly seems to be getting treatment as non-partisan. I'm cautiously optimistic.

However, one post is very Current Year:

Message for everyone from the Diversity Team: "We are working on a diversity statement that addresses diversity issues in STEM and our efforts to build an inclusive march. We are also building a diverse team of scientists passionate about this/these issues!"
We are making great progress and will keep you updated with everything that happens! Stay tuned!

Hopefully this is basically just the lip service that's required in the Current Year, in the style of the green grocer. Otherwise, the obsession with "diversity", which should be a natural byproduct of organizing in science (science is already super diverse!) looks weird and out of place.

One of the high comments on this post is very good though:

Lauren Zwar Diversity means including everyone who is a firm believer in science and what is considered scientific fact. The march is not just for scientists. But for every man, woman and child who believe that the current government administration is trying to demolish everything gained in the past few decades! Thank you for allowing non scientists like myself to join in this very important cause!

No weird obsession with making sure that there are a sufficient number of people of each ethnic background. This is the sort of diversity I can get behind - just include everyone that's interested.

- - - Updated - - -

What. How. Why.

Who are these people?

Scientists in a very left-leaning town. There are a pretty significant number of people that genuinely believe that scientific institutions are oppressive because they have failed to sufficiently include black women; their evidence is that black women are underrepresented in science relative to the general population. For a certain paradigm, the only way a group can wind up underrepresented in a prestigious profession is if there's system-level oppression.

[Elim Garak]

Considering your sig, here's an analogy on how wrong that statement is:
The Borg never hid the fact they want to assimilate you, so they can't be that bad, right?
WRONG!! Being honest about being evil(*) does not make that person any less evil.

Let me stop you right here.
Trump is not a loose borg unit out to assimilate you
Trump is not evil.
Being a liar is not being evil. Everybody lies. Even you.
Being honest about being a liar doesn't make one not a liar.
If you go "I will lie my ass off to get elected as a president" - that's honest - that's what every candidate does. The other candidates just go ONE LIE FURTHER by lying about being honest and they are quite clunky about it - so clunky it's obvious they are full of shit. Who are you gonna vote for? The one who lies LESS, obviously, unless you have an agenda (first female president, democrat, etc)

Trump didn't even invent this tactic.

- - - Updated - - -

Keep telling yourself that. Can you point out where Trump ever admitted he lied?

He doesn't need to explicitly state it. It's all in the attitude. He lies and he doesn't give a fuck. He openly lies. Then hand waves it and moves on. He is transparent as clean air. While other candidates tried very hard to appear honest, holier than Trump which only showed how full of shit they were. He brought them to his level (by blowing off their facade of honesty) and out-trumped them.

[Mad_Murdock]

Keep telling yourself that. Can you point out where Trump ever admitted he lied?

I can, he said in an interview, he wasn't a perfect person. That's pretty much saying "Hey I lie a lot because I'm going into politics and it's required"
Good enough for me!

Let me stop you right here.
Trump is not a loose borg unit out to assimilate you

I think it's a little early to make that claim

[matt4pack]

Voting for Trump was stupid. End of story. We've known from day one that he's a pathological liar. We've known from day one that he's a narcissist. We've known from day one that he makes up facts just to suit his agenda. This has been blatant since the first time he ran for office four fucking years ago.

And yet people still thought he was qualified to be president! I'm sorry, but that's fucking stupid when you ignore the goddamn evidence in front of your face that maybe, just maybe, voting for a man with the temperament of a five year old bully, might be a bad fucking idea!

It's not like Trump was some obscure man who no one knew. He's been famous for decades. People have known his personality to be like that for decades. And yet, people still thought he's qualified to be president?

They're either delusional, or stupid.

Does this mean I want some "dictatorship" where people only vote for progressives? No! Because I wouldn't be ranting if someone normal like Kasich or Bush had won. Or if Romney had won. People whom I disagree with, but I can at least fucking respect.

Boggles my mind that anyone thought Trump was worthy of being on the ballot.

And if you're insulted because you voted for Trump and I'm calling you stupid? Too bad. Stop being a snowflake, being offended has never hurt anyone.

Well when parts of the country have been decimated by globalization you can't really expect those people to think rationally after that experience. Maybe instead of blaming the people who have lost so much how about we blame the people who threw them under the bus all in the name of more profit using slave labor.

We taken most opportunity and your livelihood from you but we still expect you to go vote in a logical manner that will only benefit other areas. Yeah makes sense.

[Mad_Murdock]

Maybe instead of blaming the people who have lost so much how about we blame the people who threw them under the bus all in the name of more profit using slave labor.

We taken most opportunity and your livelihood from you but we still expect you to go vote in a logical manner that will only benefit other areas. Yeah makes sense.

I don't think that's going to happen. For all the people in the rust belt, it's their own fault for working that job and not taking night classes to become STEM scientist. Mildly odd that the young people who point fingers at the older folks who worked on a construction job for 30 years and then lost it for whatever reason, has being wrong\dumb\lazy for not getting a fall back education, yet many of those young people have degrees in worthless fields and are complaining about their inability to get their ideal job and their massive student loans.

[Elim Garak]

Never. The answer you were looking for was never.

It looks like you are under an impression that I was looking for an answer.

But then again this seems to be a common theme with Trump. He never really says anything and his supporters make up what they want to hear. It's kind of disgusting to be honest.

And all the haters truly know what he means for reals. Right? It's disgusting, I agree.

[Deleted]

Just realized DeepDrumpf was reactivated last week

[Elim Garak]

I think the difference between knowing you lie, and being proud of it, or knowing it's a vice that should be worked on. Trump claims to be the best Christian, better than the pope, nowhere in the Bible is lying a virtue to be proud of.

Well from certain point of view, the bible itself is the biggest lie. And Christians lie a lot. Every American president was a Christian, right? And lying not being a virtue is perfectly fine because in Christianity the biggest virtue it to seek forgiveness for sins.

[Celista]

Well from certain point of view, the bible itself is the biggest lie. And Christians lie a lot. Every American president was a Christian, right? And lying not being a virtue is perfectly fine because in Christianity the biggest virtue it to seek forgiveness for sins.

You can't just go about sinning, thinking you'll cash in on the forgiveness check right before you die. Every preacher in the pulpit will say the same, regardless of denomination.

Trump is degrees of magnitude different from other US presidents.

- - - Updated - - -

Voting for Trump was stupid. End of story. We've known from day one that he's a pathological liar. We've known from day one that he's a narcissist. We've known from day one that he makes up facts just to suit his agenda. This has been blatant since the first time he ran for office four fucking years ago.

And yet people still thought he was qualified to be president! I'm sorry, but that's fucking stupid when you ignore the goddamn evidence in front of your face that maybe, just maybe, voting for a man with the temperament of a five year old bully, might be a bad fucking idea!

It's not like Trump was some obscure man who no one knew. He's been famous for decades. People have known his personality to be like that for decades. And yet, people still thought he's qualified to be president?

They're either delusional, or stupid.

Does this mean I want some "dictatorship" where people only vote for progressives? No! Because I wouldn't be ranting if someone normal like Kasich or Bush had won. Or if Romney had won. People whom I disagree with, but I can at least fucking respect.

Boggles my mind that anyone thought Trump was worthy of being on the ballot.

And if you're insulted because you voted for Trump and I'm calling you stupid? Too bad. Stop being a snowflake, being offended has never hurt anyone.

They're delusional. This is what happens when politics become too polarized, you want your party to be in office no matter the cost. When you want to believe the populist rhetoric so badly that you ignore the serious flaws in your chosen candidate.

This is what also happens when said snowflakes feel threatened, their dormant racism and prejudice takes surface, and their chosen candidate takes advantage of it for personal gain.