Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Scientists and Scholars Team Up to Set Straight the March For Science

  1. #1

    Scientists and Scholars Team Up to Set Straight the March For Science


    Scientists and Scholars Team Up to Set Straight the March For Science
    Evolution News | @DiscoveryCSC
    April 17, 2017, 8:56 AM
    https://www.evolutionnews.org/2017/0...h-for-science/

    The March for Sciencee, slated for April 22, a.k.a. Earth Day, was supposedly conceived as a way to save science from its legions of alleged attackers. But, the march has devolved into a politicized, polarized, and science-dividing farce.

    "Perhaps the key benefit of the March for Science is that so many of the activists who try to hide under the mantle of science ]are no longer hiding," says Jay Richards, executive editor of The Stream. "This will allow Americans to see them for what they are: left wing ideologues."

    It's quite clear that the March For Science is shamelessly misnamed. Science is about experiment, evidence, testing, free inquiry, and open debate. But rather than glorying in freewheeling scientific debate, the March organizers insist on conformity. The April 22 parade is in lockstep with the times on university campuses, where intellectual diversity is frowned upon and drowned out by screaming, sometimes violent young people.

    So, The Stream. and the Center for Science and Culture are teaming up the week ahead of the March to provide some crucial ballast.

    From April 17-21, The Stream. and the CSC will counter the March For Science's hypocritical claims of openness and diversity with a series of essays from leading scientists and scholars. These include pieces from philosopher of science Stephen Meyer, political scientist John West, biologists Jonathan Wells and Douglas Axe, and bioethicist Wesley J. Smith.

    "If anyone deserves to be labeled 'anti-science,' it is the March For Science organizers, whose purposes are more about promoting a particular brand of politics and ideology than they are about defending science itself," says bioethicist Smith, who heads up Discovery's Center on Human Uniqueness.

    Rather than candidly acknowledge dissent among scientists, the media, together with the academic community, demand assent from the populace.

    And it isn't just about global warming. It's also about what Axe calls Darwinism's "self-righteous monoculture," or what Wells' new book labels it "zombie science."


    This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity (futility) of their mind, having the understanding darkened...
    (Ephesians 4:17-18)

    Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly...
    (Psalm 1)

  2. #2
    Administrator fuego's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    16,271
    Thanked: 14129
    Blog Entries
    1
    Glad their doing it. Not gonna help though. They're mindless zealots.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Colonel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    14,487
    Thanked: 5793
    Quote Originally Posted by GodismyJudge View Post
    It’s quite clear that the March For Science is shamelessly misnamed. Science is about experiment, evidence, testing, free inquiry, and open debate. But rather than glorying in freewheeling scientific debate, the March organizers insist on conformity. The April 22 parade is in lockstep with the times on university campuses, where intellectual diversity is frowned upon and drowned out by screaming, sometimes violent young people.
    The scientific community has always been like that. Meteors were denounced as imagination until one practically landed on a leading scientist. Darwinists got really angry in the nineties when the mithocondrial Eve was determined to be the foremother of us all 200,000 years ago according to scientific calculations on genes. Some Darwinists who believed that mankind evolved from a bunch of random apes here and there went on television and declared that there was no way they would give up their life's work for such a preposterous theory. They themselves claim that religion is the conformer but ever since the scientific community itself became a truthsayer in society they have behaved the exact same way the RCC used to do. Not necessarily about details but about their various world views, paradigms and what furthers or hampers the progress of those things.

  4. #4

    ...Our colleagues Steve Meyer, Jay Richards, and Wesley Smith had a great conversation at the Heritage Foundation today, joining up with Marlo Lewis of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Their subject was "March for Science or March for Scientism? Understanding the Real Threats to Science in America."

    If you missed it you can see it now on YouTube.

    With the March for Science coming up this Saturday on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., the panel pointed to how the "anti-science" label is wielded to shut down challenges to the "consensus" and to advance, as Wesley Smith put it, "anti-human" advocacy.

    Stephen Meyer described how "Darwin's public defenders" promote evolution "not only as settled science but as the basis for a fully materialistic ideology." The so-called consensus pushes "textbook orthodoxy," while "not acknowledging that problems exist" with it, meanwhile directing at opponents "the same epithets in all the [relevant] debates," whether on evolution, fossil fuels, climate change — "anti-science," "pseudo-science," "science denial."


    In the current "battle of ideas," said Dr. Meyer, it's vital to "unmask the source of these ideas" we critique, revealing the "deeper view that there is no qualitative difference between animals and humans because both were produced by the same mechanism of unguided, materialistic evolution."


    Dr. Richards focused on the "rhetorical function" of this often-heard word, "consensus," which is used "to silence skeptical doubt" from the public. Because "there's always a crank available immediately online" on any subject, scientific or otherwise, we need to distinguish needed skepticism from time-wasting crankery. How do you do that? Jay talked about some of the "reasons you might want to doubt a so-called scientific consensus." He's got 12 in all.

    One of those reasons is when you see "different claims getting bundled together," on all of which the orthodox party demands that you either "sign on or sign off."

    The panel included some sharp disagreement. Yes, it's OK to disagree about matters pertaining to science!


    https://www.evolutionnews.org/2017/0...on-see-it-now/


    This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity (futility) of their mind, having the understanding darkened...
    (Ephesians 4:17-18)

    Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly...
    (Psalm 1)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
You can avoid major, expensive repair costs with an extended service plan for your Chevrolet. We have plans for all Chevy Models, including the Chevrolet Cruze.