Scientists, Please Don’t March

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach-Crossposted from my blog, Skating Under The Ice.

Well, the bad news is that a whole bunch of scientists are going to have a march on Washington … on Earth Day.

Why is this a bad idea? Three reasons. There’s no clarity on what they are marching for. There’s no clarity on what they are marching against. And they are marching on Earth Day.

Here’s what I mean about clarity. If you ask anyone on the street what Donald Trump’s message was during the campaign, you get a variety of answers. Build the wall. Make America great again. Drain the swamp. Bring back the jobs. Different answers, but almost everybody can tell you something that Trump stood for.

Now, ask people what Hillary’s message was … crickets. The problem was she didn’t have a message. A few months after the election, and hardly anyone can remember what she stood for … nor do we have any idea what the scientist are marching for.

You see, Hillary proved that being AGAINST something is not sufficient. She tried to run as the “anti-Trump”, and managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

And now, the scientists are doing the same thing. They think that casting themselves as the anti-Trump scientists is sufficient, even when they are not at all clear about what they are against. It seems they are driven by their fears rather than by any event or actual danger.

Well, that’s not entirely true about them not being for anything. Here you go, here’s what passes for their message:

“Yes, this is a protest, but it’s not a political protest,” said Jonathan Berman, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio and a lead organizer of the march. “The people making decisions are in Washington, and they are the people we are trying to reach with the message: You should listen to evidence.”

“Listen to evidence”? That’s it?

You mean like the evidence that showed beyond question that Donald Trump couldn’t win the election? You mean like the evidence that Michael Mann and the Climategate conspirators made up out of the whole cloth? You mean like the evidence of Ioannidis who showed that most peer-reviewed published scientific research is false? The evidence that Ioannidis referred to when he said that “Evidence-based medicine has been hijacked“? That evidence?

But setting the weak and uncertain nature of the “evidence” aside, that is the among the most pathetic slogans imaginable. Why?

Because every single person that I know who hears “You should listen to evidence!”, including myself, scientists and non-scientists alike, will say the same thing:

I AM LISTENING TO EVIDENCE, FOOL, DON’T INSULT ME!

And the “people making decisions in Washington” will all say the same.  Find me one person who thinks they are not listening to the evidence … you’ll look for a long time. All of us believe we can tell gold from fools gold.

I feel sorry for these folks. They are most likely good scientists in their fields, but they truly are out of their depth organizing either a march or a movement. A public march is only worth doing if you have a clear and compelling message. You need to show people a path from here to the desired future, offer real actions people can take, and urge people to take those actions.  But “You should listen to evidence”? Where does that go?

Not only that, but they are marching on Earth Day! Talk about the height of cluelessness. Do they really think that becoming just another part of the highly politically polarized and generally anti-human Earth Day circus is going to make them more visible, more viable, or more believable?

Do they truly think that hanging out with people who advocate “de-development” and forced population reduction and who think that humans are a “plague on the earth” will burnish their scientific credentials?

On Earth Day the scientists will be in the middle of the usual pseudo-scientific parade of “iridologists”, and “reflexologists”, and folks who think turning out their lights for an hour shows they are virtuous, and homeopathic snake oil salesmen, and people against some war somewhere … on what planet is this possibly of any benefit to science? Whose brilliant scheme is this? Find that person and fire them immediately.

earth-day-iii

All that having the march on Earth Day will do is dilute and distract from the scientist’s message … not that that will make much difference given the pathetic message. But again, whose bright idea is this? You want to march on a day when nothing is going on, when every camera in town is focused on you alone.

Finally, these folks don’t seem to understand the position of scientists in society these days. Wearing a lab coat doesn’t mean what it used to mean. Today, I laughed to see that Bill Nye the Science Guy’s lab coat was a prop in a SuperBowl ad for Tide detergent. Oh, they got Bill’s lab coat whiter than white … but they couldn’t clean up his reputation, or that of science. Remember what Ioannidis found out: these days, most peer-reviewed results are false. And don’t think that people haven’t noticed. We’ve seen too many “evidence-based” predictions of impending doom from eminent scientists, predictions that have all crashed and burned. No atolls sunk in the ocean. No 50 million climate refugees by 2010. No “population bomb” exploding. No food riots in the streets.

Here’s the rude truth.

In the US in 2017, for a large segment of the populace, too many scientists are just stuck up elites in lab coats who want to lecture us on how we should live.

For those people, scientists are right up there with Hollywood dilettantes like Leonardo DeCaprio, taking a helicopter from his mega-yacht in the Mediterranean to the airport, where he boards a private jet to New York to tell us all how we’re eco-criminals for burning too much fossil fuel. And just like the scientists, DeCaprio keeps telling us we should “listen to the evidence” … riiiight, we’ll get on that straightaway …

And now, for that same segment of the electorate, guess what they see happening. The scientists are having a hissy-fit because people are no longer listening to their terrifying lectures about the horrible dangers of, well, everything—margarine will kill us this week, but next week butter will kill us and margarine is OK, this week diesel cars will save Europe, next week diesel cars are choking it with pollution  … and as a result, more and more people are like “Talk to the hand, the head’s not listening!”.

And in a stunning move that couldn’t possibly go wrong, the elite scientists have decided to strike out against the Trumpian Oppression Of Noble Scientists and march around Washington in their lab coats and lecture us some more …

Really? That’s their plan? We’re gonna bow to the irresistible force of the lab coat?

And here’s the best part. This is the message of the lecture from the scientific elite—we plebes, as well as the “people making decisions in Washington”, are either not smart enough to recognize evidence when we see it, or we are deliberately ignoring evidence.

Yeah, that’ll fetch ’em all right, tell us we’re stupid! That will convince us to change our evil ways … after all, insulting your opposition worked so well for Hillary …

So I implore all scientists, please don’t add your names to this foolish attempt. Don’t go on this march around Washington to lecture us on why we’re wrong. It will just piss people off and further damage the reputation of science and scientists. We’re lectured out, you’ve cried “wolf” too many times. Stay home and enjoy the day.

Four AM on a rainy morning … yeah, I am a night owl … all the good things of life to you all.

w.

PLEASE, if you are commenting, QUOTE THE EXACT WORDS YOU ARE DISCUSSING so we can all understand your subject.

Advertisements

179 thoughts on “Scientists, Please Don’t March

      • What is needed is a large group of “protesters” dispersed within the “scientists” wearing sandwich boards saying something like “We march for truth in evidence” then showing the actual temperatures and how stable they really are. Or the charts with model runs vs measurements. Or the ones with the altered temp series graphs. Etc

      • Well Climate Science is settled so they are obviously marching because they have absolutely nothing better to do

        That or they decided to band together and form a scientist marching band

    • When I was young and foolish, I joined a couple of anti-war marches in Washington in the late 60″s. Marching was a nice walk and we were filled with self-importance, which satisfies the unreflective soul. After the march there was always sex, drugs, and rock and roll. Very festive. Very self-important.

      Now that I am older and foolish, I can see the appeal of revisiting youthful ways for an afternoon of festival and, yes, self-importance. This is what is getting these “scientists” out there to have a fun day in D.C.

      A focused message would miss the point.

      • When I was young, joining a demo March was a great way of getting laid. The world’s most gullible women have to go on demo marches.

        Now I am older, I can sneer and pine for my lost youth.

      • Yeah, I attended a couple too.

        Until I noticed all of the guys in London Fogs, wearing hats with Press cards stuck in the hat band.
        I also noticed other men wearing similar clothes, but their Press cards were clearly marked at CBS, NBC, Inquirer, Bulletin, etc.

        That caused me to watch the guys with unmarked Press cards. Instead of photographing the marchers as a whole, they were focusing on people singularly. Especially protest leaders, highly active or boisterous protesters and attractive ladies.

        Nor did they interview anyone.

        I stopped attending the protests. I like anonymity, without pictures, circles and enlargements.

    • Thought I read M. Mann promoting a march of scientists. He probably decided to join the earth day crowd when it was looking like a Dozen Mann March.

    • It’s just another Marxist innocence club. They are marching for Marxism and it’s policy based science.

    • Yup, it’s really the “Please don’t slay our Golden Goose” march. If they had any real “science” to support their fear mongering, it would have been under our noses many years and many $Billions ago.

    • Have you seen the Rd/Blue continental map of the USA, that shows how may counties in the USA voted for Trump over Clinton ??

      It is like the 2 x 4 between the eyes.

      It really shows how the people of the USA voted; and they voted with their own local community uppermost in their mind.

      G

      • And the big city denizens voted as they were told by their Democrat machine. A Community Organizer is nothing more than a Tammany Hall ward fixer.

  1. nonono….please march more,,,please do more….trash some businesses and burn some more cars….
    throw the biggest hissy fits anyone has ever seen…..

    They are most likely good scientists in their fields….no they’re not….or they wouldn’t be using props
    …their science would stand on it’s own

  2. No scientist worthy of the name will join this so-called “March.”

    You will see those whose grants may not be renewed or others trying to be “Politically Correct” in front of their peers. If you want to see real scientists worthy of the name, come to Heartland’s ICCC-12 this March 23 & 24!

    • Rhetorical questions: Can anyone who joins a ‘march’ of this nature still be called a ‘Scientist”. Isn’t a scientist a person who ‘does’ science? When they are not doing science are they still scientists?
      It seems to me that everyone has the right to ‘march’ (or not) as they choose but when they are marching they ate NOT doing whatever ‘science’ they normally do. Therefore, at least at that time, they are NOT scientists. [And Political Science is an oxymoron!]

      • “Scientist” is the new “priest” with special (perhaps gnostic) knowledge that allows them to interpret information and tell you what to do.

        Will this be overheard during the march?

        Being ‘specialised’ means you the ordinary working stiff couldn’t possibly understand the intricacies of ‘climate’ so do as we say, not as we do, we know better. Proof? Look at how white my lab coat is! It is the sign of Vestal purity, and you just know how good those Vestal virgins were. Look at my white coat, think of the virgins, and give me your money.

    • This crap will soon die a natural death, because people actually DON’T LIKE NEGATIVITY. To be clear, losers have little appeal. Whining, victim posturing, depression-mongering chronic complainers are exactly the people you dodge taking to lunch. Fear also has a short shelf life once the thing we’re supposed to run screaming off a cliff about just. doesn’t. happen. Which about covers most of the President Trump hysteria.

      Must say I just don’t *get* this whole SJW virtue-signalling thing. Why not just live and enjoy your life, RELAX, and be overjoyed that YOU’RE not a refugee, a victim of terrorism, sexually confused or in receipt of Hep-C? The world is the world, and always has been!

      For my part, I’m just BEAUCOUP glad I no longer have to worry about “global warming!”

    • So the march will take place the day BEFORE the conference. An excellent opportunity to advertise the ICCC! Get out there with signs alerting people to the climate conference and promoting REAL science. March with Kenji!
      I am still hoping that someone will video the march and interview the participants. Ask them their occupation and why they are marching. My bet is that most of them aren’t scientists and have only a vague notion of the purpose or goal they are marching for. This will especially be true since there will be a lot of eco-loonies marching on Earth Day.
      In my callow youth I participated in a high school announcement advertising the very first Earth Day. If I knew then what I know now…

      • I tried to google a Bill paying company that sends me my pay check. Well I bingled it actually and it couldn’t come up with the company; no matter how I put it for it to find.

        Top of the heap it went to was Bill Nye, and I couldn’t get bing to move away from that.

        G

    • “algore” that great scientist, failed the single science course he took in college. “dicaprio” has not even graduated from grammar school if I remember his bio correctly. His parents took him out of school to work on his acting career. So we have Dumb and Dumber. Each has way more money than brains.

  3. This is part of the weaponization process, to create a knee-jerk response without examining any evidence at all. Soon, people will line the streets in millions to protest if Trump sneezes, the mobocracy that we’ve all heard of before. I’d like to ask them: for “refugees,” what is an acceptable percentage of Jihadists? Give me a number. Can you guarantee that it won’t be exceeded with current vetting?

  4. The same thing happened during the “Women’s March” that was actually an anti-Trump march. The unending tantrum fit of the Left with the advent of the Trump Age at least is having the salutary effect of emptying all leftist mobilization into a single anti-Trump cultist hivemind chant – and in the process becoming a background noise soon to be forgotten in the perception of the public.

    If some scientists fall for that siren song and become part of the background noise perhaps that will be a good thing. Science used to have a conservative bias, but a few decades ago the leftist infiltration in Academia sadly started to assimilate STEM fields too. It’s time for that to stop, and letting them march may be a good start.

    In my country we have a saying that roughly translates as “the best way to discredit liberals is to let them speak freely”.

    • That, combined with the following, would make a great T-Shirt:

      “MY Science is based on actual data, not on adjustments, assumptions, homogenization, or any other euphemism you can come up with for “torture the data until it tells the story you like.””

  5. Let them march; wonderful opportunity to change the locks and empty their desks while they are away…

      • The air controllers did a lot more than take a few vacation days to march. In truth, the air controllers could have been prosecuted as felons. Reagan took the less messy road of firing them for dereliction of duty. It meant they could never work for the federal government again and loss of fantastic benefits. It is too much to believe that scientists are as stupid as those air controllers. All federal employees are haunted by what they did.

        Certain conduct outside of their federal jobs could also be grounds for firing and Trump is quirky. Something for government scientists to think about.

      • I just raised this issue with a Never Trumper. First, I had to explain it (history, of course, started for most of them in November 2016), then had to tell them that, no, it was “fake news”, it actually happened.

        They don’t have a clue what’s coming, do they? AND THIS HAS ONLY BEEN THREE WEEKS!

  6. There are all too many “scientists” who bear the same relationship to the concept as Christian Scientists. I have a degree in psychology, which is not really a science yet, and tended to teach me that any discipline with readily identifiable alignments, like Freudians or behaviorists, is definitely not science.
    “Climate science”, like economics, has been adopted by political factions and mass movements to further their other causes. Most adherents of CAGW do not really care about or understand the rationale, much as most Marxists do not care about economic theory.
    To make a safe prediction, most of the marchers will be the usual snowflakes, making the usual snowflake speeches.

    • The whole thing reminds me of a famous convulsion in Meiji-era Japan, when faced with rapid change many youngsters who couldn’t quite wrap their brains around progress took to the streets of Kyoto, many cross-dressing, screeching “Ee-ja-nai-ka!!!” which translates loosely as “What the Hell!” Those “protests” were as unfocused as what we’re seeing today, with that meaningless slogan just about as vapid as the “women’s march.” What exactly were these loons protesting, the fact that they’re women? Sure looked like it to me! Someone REALLY needs to search for astronomical correspondences with mass human freakouts; solar minimum, maximum, magnetic field surge, what? If a cage full of rats ran around like this you’d think an earthquake was imminent!

    • Today, most kids that become environmental science majors in college are usually environmental activists as they enter this field of study, and their pre-determined bias manifest. If they want to become a “climate scientist” it is because they think there is a problem and they want to fix it. ie; if you don’t think climate change is man-made and a problem, you probably don’t go into this line of study. Consider that most college professors and environmental scientists work for the government or a university where almost everyone has the same green political attitude and reading materials. Most earth / weather / environment related scholastic scientists never made it in the real world. They stayed in academia because they have a good memory, thus did well on tests. They often end up with many degrees, awards, titles, and published peer reviewed papers, but don’t always have good common sense and can’t always see the big picture. These scientists really know their specific exact area of expertise, but don’t often do well when they cross over into other disciplines, which is exactly what the global warming science is – complicated and overlaps many fields when common sense is needed. Climate scientists, like all humans, are mostly motivated to promote the truth, but their biased behavior may be influenced, and even dominated, by their peer’s behavior, political views, careerism, and monetary incentives.

      don rady

  7. This reminds me of a non-violent event that happened when I was in high school, don’t remember the subject, no doubt an excess of hormones. Curiosity is supposed to be a juvenile trait retained by scientists, but this makes one wonder what else it drags along. A generation or so after the event (1970s) we learned that without hydrocarbons or the equivalent we would starve or the equivalent. That movement left some fossil windmill towers, a few which may still be around. There are lots of old sayings about ignoring history.

  8. Listen to the evidence? For most climate science it seems that evidence is their horror stories of a distant future. Predictions have never been evidence, except for planetary movements maybe.
    Astronomy can tell on seconds when and where a solar eclipse will take place in 2100, but climateers can hardly predict the weather a week forward, and they can hardly tell what the weather was a year ago.

    • Ever notice how the weather report constantly moves the target? Yesterday we supposedly had half an inch of rain coming Tuesday; now it’s down to a quarter inch. My cousin with a Ouija board can hit those averages!

  9. Willis, why try to correct them? The last 3 months have shown that progessives, the left, Democrats, the MSM, have not understood what has happened. They have not figured out that their politically correct narrative has been rejected. It seems a goal of the new US administration to sideline the MSM and their view, which they figured had become orthodox. I have the impression the new admin’s approach is working, judging by ratings given by Rasmussen. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_feb6

    • Keith February 6, 2017 at 1:32 pm

      Willis, why try to correct them? The last 3 months have shown that progessives, the left, Democrats, the MSM, have not understood what has happened. They have not figured out that their politically correct narrative has been rejected.

      I do it for a few reasons. First, I’m a guy who would rather light a candle than curse the darkness. I can’t just sit and do nothing when I see someone driving a bus off a cliff.

      Second, I have many liberal friends, and they are generally good, kind, and well-meaning people.

      Finally, and most important, competition. We all know that capitalism works best when there is competition. And we all know that science only works when there is competition, it’s built around one scientist finding fault in another scientist’s work.

      What appears to be less well known is that the same is true of politics. I don’t want a one-party state. Just as we needed the Repuglycan Party to hold Obama’s feet to the fire, we need the Demogogic Party to hold Trump’s feet to the fire.

      So I do my best …

      w.

  10. I think I’ll go and wear a sandwich board that says something like “WERE ALL CLUELESS!” on the front and “IGNORE THIS MARCH!” on the back. When I’m confronted by a bunch of dweebs I’ll just act like the guy in Deliverance who kept telling Lewis, (Burt Reynolds), about the Driver Brothers.

  11. “Why is this a bad idea? Three reasons. There’s no clarity on what they are marching for. There’s no clarity on what they are marching against. And they are marching on Earth Day.”
    Good point, maybe I missed it but what is their beef, Trump just took office?
    Is it the requirement that there be honest science and debate on climate change or is it the typical my way or the highway that has been going on for at least 8 years?
    Maybe they should think that they might expose their lack of scientific approach and their lack of utility in the new “honest” science world.

    • “Ed Klein: Obama’s Coming Crusade Against Trump”

      Yes, that’s it. The Left no longer has the power and they can’t handle it.

  12. You all know that 99+ % of these so called scientists are not scientists. I mean Anthony’s dog is one of them.
    If any of them work for the government, then this is a clear violation of the Hatch act and they should be sent packing.

    • “You all know that 99+ % of these so….” Bingo I think we have a winner. I’ll wait to see pics of the march. I still believe a lot of brand new white lab coats will be handed out. Weather (pun) a scientist puts one and march on is questionable.

  13. When they say “listen to the evidence” they really mean “listen to us”. Kind of like a kid with a soiled diaper — it’s evidence, and it’s our evidence.

    • worse than that, it’s “LISTEN TO MY PREDICTIONS!”

      If I were nearby and had the energy, I might choose to go along dressing as a Pythonesque prophet

      I could cite soothsaying, the evidence is in the goat guts! Look people, portents ! Why are you not seeing The Signs? Everywhere around us there are Symbols. NaCl ! Fe2SO4 ! Stop, listen to me, for I have seen the future! Doom awaits those who cannot cast the CO2s. Gaia requires a sacrifice and the sacrifice must be thee! It is for the greater good! Listen, don’t run away.. stop, come back !

  14. “lessen to the evidence” Hmm, the reply should be you first.

    It should be thrown back at them “lessen to the evidence” of those you disagree with to those you disparage, ridicule and treat with malice. Take the first step yourself’s “lessen to the evidence” .

    It is not “lessen to the evidence” that they truly implore but rather ” Lessen to us!”

    michael

  15. If they really wanted attention, and a chance to make their points, they’d challenge contrarians to a series of a dozen sub-topic-focused debates on PBS.

  16. Such fun. Leonardo the Smug plaintively cries “wolf” and the villagers rush forward to find him cooing and kissy-facing a small Pekinese. They leave in disgust. Al Sees-all Gorical shouts “wolf” and the villagers come again. Al points out sheep are missing from the flock, but someone notices several large cuts of smoking meat on his colossal thermadore BBQ and again they depart. Mannic Regression Michael squeals “wolf” and when the villagers come he points to suspicious paw prints on the ground. A young boy points to the hocky stick with a dogs paw grafted to the end hidden in Mikes security blanket. They rough him up a bit, break his hockey stick and depart.

    Now apparently if a multitude of equally reliable scoundrels in white coats converge on Washington and shout with one voice “wolf” it will actually means something, Trump with have a change of heart and we’ll all trade in our SUV’s for Birkenstocks.

  17. “You should listen to evidence.”

    What they really mean is, “You should listen to the evidence we tell you to listen to and ignore all the rest.”

  18. “It seems they are driven by their fears rather than by any event or actual danger.”
    Hit the nail on the head directly with that one Willis. In fact, this is true of many people (mostly on the left). They react emotionally with little regard for rational thought. And since fear and loathing are among the strongest emotions, the haters tend to bubble to the top. Trying to have a rational discussion with these types is an exercise in frustration.

  19. Me have no problem with scientists protesting, authoring manifestos or providing a backdrop for good old TV.

    As long as their science are not funded by us, the taxpayer. Get a job, do science and then protest. Fine with me.

    Otherwise please go back to your publicly funded lab and keep working.

  20. Bottom line, if they understand it, they would be able to model it. They can’t.

    Climate “Science” on Trial; If Something is Understood, it can be Modeled
    https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2017/02/06/climate-science-on-trial-if-something-is-understood-it-can-be-modeled/

    How to Discuss Global Warming with a “Climate Alarmist.” Scientific Talking Points to Win the Debate.
    https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2017/01/03/how-to-discuss-global-warming-with-a-liberal-the-smoking-gun-files/

  21. …Scientists, Please Don’t March…

    I don’t think the scientists ARE marching. Not the real ones, anyway…

  22. Willis: “I do it for a few reasons”…stop people “driving a bus off a cliff”…..”competition” in politics as well as capitalism.

    Ok, point taken. My problem with it is that it presupposes a reasoned response to an argument. So far, there has been scant evidence of that type of approach. Rather, there has been what James Delingpole characterises as “point and shriek”, in this post about the left not acknowledging that the open borders policy has risks.

    http://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2016/12/25/delingpole-moronic-self-righteous-disgusting-losers-tried-to-turn-the-berlin-attack-on-nigel-farage/

    Before we get to the hoped-for “reasoned response”, there will be many Social Justice Warrior attacks.

    http://www.voxday.net/mart/SJW_Attack_Survival_Guide.pdf

    Once we see a diminution of SJW aggression, rants, sore-loser syndrome, and racist remarks about Mr Trump’s skin colour (orange fuhrer is not my president – can you imagine the uproar if someone had denigrated Mr Obama for being black), then maybe your approach will be heard.

    • Keith, thanks for the reply. You say:

      Ok, point taken. My problem with it is that it presupposes a reasoned response to an argument. So far, there has been scant evidence of that type of approach. Rather, there has been what James Delingpole characterises as “point and shriek”, in this post about the left not acknowledging that the open borders policy has risks.

      Ah, I think I see the problem. You think I’m writing to the scientists who are going to march. I’m not.

      As I’ve said more than once, I write for the lurkers. I know that as you point out, people whose minds are made up have already made up their minds … so while I may be addressing them, just as I am currently addressing you, my main intention is to direct my arguments to the lurkers.

      These are the folks who think more than they comment, whose minds may well not be made up, and who outnumber commenters by at least ten to one.

      It’s also why I’m not all that fussed if my arguments are not sufficient to convince a commenter who opposes me, and why I may continue a discussion with that person long past the point where this is obvious … convincing him or her is not my main objective. Instead, I want to get my ideas and their ideas in juxtaposition so the hundreds of lurkers can be clear on the arguments and make up their own minds.

      My best to you … and to the lurkers, of course …

      w.

    • Wish people knew that. I have many times been accused of being rude when sticking to facts. Trouble is beliefs trump facts EVERY time.

  23. “Listening” to the evidence is exactly what they should stop doing, and instead open their eyes and SEE the evidence.

  24. Gee perhaps these genius level ‘scientists’ will bring some evidence along with them. They’ve been telling us about how much evidence the 97% have for years but I haven’t actually seen any yet. Lots of models but sadly no evidence as yet.

  25. Superb, and timely post. But too generous to ‘the scientists’. You clearly have compassion for them, while I struggle with 50 shades of contempt. Let them march, I say. Let them display their superficial soundbites and their turpitude. Good could come of that. And of course, Earth Day is ideal since it stinks to high heaven.

    • On the “Earth Day is ideal since it stinks to high heaven” front, how about this message for a placard – “If Black Lives Matter to YOU, then don’t support the “Green” agenda, which has ended more black lives than all the unfortunate law enforcement encounters in the entire world.”

  26. Willis,

    Do the organizers of the march want to have scientists be a high percentage of the marchers? If yes we can laugh.

    Since climate scientists are overwhelmingly gov’t employees or are almost entirely affiliated with gov’t institutions, then it is a gov’t employee march on the Washington DC gov’t. Now I understand.

    John

  27. Let’s hope the white coats have the same effect doctor’s white coats were rumored to have on patients.

  28. I hope the giants in the field show up. Particularly, the leaders from:

    Eugenics
    Lysenkoism
    Piltdown Archeologists
    Bigfootists
    Astrologists
    24th chromosome adherents

    and various other shamans from the settled scientists…

  29. Note that they are all about “evidence” , not data.
    I am all about NOT ignoring data, something the alarmists can’t or refuse to understand

  30. Thus, the cycles of social evolution mimic the cycles of evolution in the animal kingdom:

    This is what the “March For Science” really amounts to, … metaphorically.

    Have a nice fall, gentlemen.

  31. The current issue of ‘New Scientist’ (a UK-based weekly known for its “sensationalist bent and a lack of basic knowledge by its writers”) lead with an editorial titled “Speak out if you can”. It was dominated by a photograph of some protesters’ placards which read

    “Respect science”
    “What do we want?” “Evidence-based claims!”
    “When do we want it?” “After peer-review!”
    “Science is not a Liberal Conspiracy”

    Just ‘evidence *based*’? Just ‘claims’? Just ‘peer-reviewed’? That’s good enough for these guys? They want ‘respect’ – for that?

    And ‘Respect Science’? Well it depends on which science you’re talking about – they’re all different and they’re certainly not equally deserving of respect. (And many areas of study now mascerade as ‘sciences’ when really they are not. If a so-called science has the word ‘science’ in its name . . .etc.)

    But I especially love the one about ‘Science is not a Liberal Conspiracy’. So science is OK with liberals again these days? That’s great! – welcome back onboard! We missed you! But remember, only a few years ago it was trendy to make statements like these:

    1/ “The validity of theoretical propositions in the sciences is in no way affected by factual evidence” (Gergen 1988 p.37)

    2/ “The natural world has a small or non-existent role in the construction of scientific knowledge” (Collins 1981 p 31)

    3/ “For the relativist [ . . ] there is no sense attached to the idea that some standards or beliefs are really rational as distinct from merely locally accepted as such” (Barnes and Bloor 1981 p27)

    4/ “Science legimates [sic] itself by linking its discoveries with power, a connection which *determines* (not merely influences) what counts as reliable knowledge . . .” (Aronowitz 1988 p204)

    The above (and the bibliography) can all be found in “Pseudoscience and Postmodernism: Antagonists or Fellow Travelers?” by Alan D. Sokal 2004 http://www.physics.nyu.edu/sokal/pseudoscience_rev.pdf

    • JCalvertN(UK) February 6, 2017 at 4:20 pm

      Thanks, J. I liked this one:

      1/ “The validity of theoretical propositions in the sciences is in no way affected by factual evidence” (Gergen 1988 p.37)

      It reminded me of the old Soviet joke. Every Soviet army unit had a Political Commissar, who made sure everyone was following the Soviet party line. One day he over-ruled one of the officers as to the right way to do something.

      “But Comrade Commisar”, the officer said, “we tried that way already and it worked well in practice!”

      “Ahh, there is your mistake, Comrade”, said the Commissar. “Yes, it works well in practice … but it would never work in theory!”

      Best wishes,

      w.

      • Yogi Berra (yes, the one and only): “In theory, practice is the same as theory; but in practice, it isn’t.”

  32. I’ve worked my entire life in the aerospace industry, which has more acronyms than the world has Starbucks. But I have never seen anyone with a penchant for making acronyms and abbreviations at a clip quite like climate “scientists.” It has always astonished me, because it adds nothing to the discussion – except, perhaps, the patina of something truly amazing, like space travel.

    However, I myself think there is one more acronym that needs to be established for this march. We’ll call it the march against “Trumpian Oppression Of Noble Scientists”, or “TOONS.” That is fitting.

  33. She is here,making a complete fool of HERSELF,about her favorite topic,Arctic ice conditions:

    Increase In Multi-Year Ice Over The Past Decade

    Several,including me been all over her brainless comments at Tony Heller’s blog

  34. Trump’s message was clear. MAGA needs no explanation. Not so, Hillary’s rational for running–“IMT IWLE”. “It’s my turn; I’ve waited long enough.” Mostly because she couldn’t actually say that. But it was the reason she was running.

  35. Scientists marching… a/k/a exercising… outside. In direct sunlight. Where the fresh air will get into their lungs.
    Someone didn’t think this through (or more likely, very few actual scientists will be in that march, more likely people who “love science” as long as they don’t have to learn any).

    • Yes. In my experience the people who most like science tend not to be the sort of people who like to go on marches loudly complaining about something or other.

  36. (y)

    Science is not a popularity contest to the highest bidder, i.e. the Clinton Foundation et al.

    But these Fools should march to show the world their banality and stupidity as a clown car in a Circus of Fools.

    Their real horror is the loss of money! As fraudsters at EPA, NASA, NOAA, NSF, USGS and the smurf agencies employees lose money, The AGU, AMS, APS and AAAS loose money multiplied.

    Ah Ha! The raison d’être of the AGU “President” is a dead corpse on a street in Chicago.

    Ha ha

  37. Scientists have the social justice big green virus just like anyone else who has gone through today’s John Dewey progressive leftist educational system. Sad thing is they don’t understand that people are starting to see them as shills and tools, which many of them have become. They may start to see the light when the funding dries up. And dry up it will. They won’t be happy until citizens hold them in contempt.

  38. Twas ever thus. remember Vietnam?
    Stop the war!

    Never “start the peace”

    New leftism is vociferous opposition to bad stuff:its all about stating issues and problems.

    It has no solutions though.

  39. Just what the nation needs, another group of clueless protesters, sigh….The marching scientists won’t do much for their reputations, this most certainly is true, but they will be good useful idiots for the global warming scare mongers to help bolster their cause. The media too will trot out endless clips of them, especially if they have signs.

  40. We need some people in Washington who will go up to the first scientist in a lab coat with a sign “Listen to the evidence”, and say: “OK, I’ll listen. Tell me the evidence.”
    And you won’t get told any. I have been pleading with all and sundry for years: “If there’s any evidence I don’t know about that proves this global warning alarm is true, please tell it to me, because I cannot find any.”
    If anyone gets some actual evidence out of these fools, I’ll be very greatly surprised.

  41. What evidence should we listen to? The only message I seem to get is that climate science is beyond question.
    That means it has a clear cut answer yes to the one question of can you prove it beyond any doubt whatever an not just beyond reasonable doubt? So let us see it openly presented clearly honestly with no adjustments and certainly none to data previously sold as beyond question.

  42. Require every government scientist who marches to answer one of five randomly selected philosophical scientific questions. Then collate the results.

    Sack the ones who most need sacking!

  43. Scientists who march.. remember this

    YOU ARE BEING LAUGHED AT

    just like the March for Women was LAUGHED at.

    Just like the supporters for Hilarity… are being LAUGHED at..

    You are a JOKE that just KEEPS ON GIVING !!

    cue….. mosh, nick, griff, McClod etc etc

    You are a JOKE that just KEEPS ON GIVING !!

  44. Thanks Willis. A good analysis of both Hilary and the march. They are not along in failing to set clear objectives and therefore a clear message. Everywhere I went in my career I found these idiots in charge of their bloody great mess.

  45. Willis: “I write for the lurkers”….”folks who think more than they comment, whose minds may well not be made up, and who outnumber commenters by at least ten to one”.

    On that basis, I totally agree.

    There may be a smidgen of evidence that some “news” outlets are softening the rhetoric just a tad. It might be because they fear they may be marginalised if they continue the shrieking.

    That is what I was getting at. There may be a deliberate ploy by the present white house to let the MSM get so distracted dealing with fairly outrageous tweets etc., that people on the right (and maybe the centre) just gives up entirely on parts of the MSM. Once the more left-leaning outlets and organisations start to realise that, there may be a return to debate. For example yesterday Democrat Dianne Feinstein made some reasoned comments, in contrast to the stance of “I oppose”, whatever it might be, made by many of her colleagues.

    Thank you for the dialogue, and best wishes…..

  46. Two comments.

    In my job duties, I engage scientists across a large state university system employing thousands of scientists in conversations about workplace safety, environmental compliance and stewardship. These are scientists ranging from laboraticians to field researchers to extension educators. I regularly broach the subject of climate change, and RARELY do I hear one who believes in CAGW. The one exception I can recall is an activist, blogging researcher in an atmospheric sciences department. My admittedly anecdotal evidence is that the 97% claim is reversed.

    Second. LAB COATS ARE PPE. Cardinal rule – Never wear your lab coat outside of the lab! Anyone who does is written up for a safety violation. So, if anyone shows up at the march in a lab coat, he/she is not a well-trained scientist, if a scientist at all. The same is true of medical scientists (doctors). Recall Obama’s photo op backed by a “church choir” of alleged doctors in lab coats. If any of those was my doctor, I’d fire him/her in a nanosecond.

  47. Engineers use the forces and materials of nature for the economic benefit of mankind. As an engineer, you know those guys who actually use what scientists produce to make things, I don’t understand the meaning of “listen to the science”. I was never told to “listen to the science” in engineering school. To me “listen to the science” sounds like a recipe for engineering disaster, and spending billions on something not necessary when you could be spending money on something needed is one of the definitions of an engineering disaster. Engineers dont listen to the science, the have to understand all aspects of the science and have confidence that the science is repeatable and useful enough to make good predictions. Otherwise engineers are just winging it … and winging it isn’t engineering it is gambling.

    • Oops meant “listen to the evidence” not “listen to the science”. Was thinking of a protestor sign.

  48. The Left has a great record of destroying everything they touch. Doing an anti-Trump march seems to fit in their drive to put trust in science and scientist in general into the same bucket as those that trust the MSM.

      • However well intended you were, philjourdan, your concealed carry commit is incendiary and misleading.

        Concealed carry permittees are among the most peaceable identifiable group on the planet. Read up on it.

      • @Dave Fair – CCs do not carry to be macho or for a phallic symbol. They carry it for protection. The issue is these animals attacking, usually en masse as they are cowards one on one, seemingly defenseless folks. CCs will not seek a confrontation, but when a mob sucker punches them or whacks them with a 2×4, they will defend themselves.

        You misunderstood my comment. At no time did I say they would initiate violence. But they will respond to violence directed at them. And that is the perils the rioters have yet to face, mostly because they riot in GFZs – or as they are better known – baiting crazy areas.

      • philjourdan, my comment was not meant as a personal criticism.

        In any case, one against a violent mob is a losing proposition.

      • That, too. But the big libs incite the gullible mobs; while at the same time accusing President Trump of inciting the right wing.

        Which political persuasion riots? Fear of the Tea Party was grossly over blown. Fear of the radical libs is rational.

  49. There is a very tired question that new artists ask in forums consisting of more experienced artists: “What is art?” — Nobody can really answer the question, or everybody answers the question significantly differently, because the word has lost touch with the reality of what it originally came into existence to describe.

    I wonder whether the word, “science” is headed down this same path. What is science? will eventually elicit the response, “Oh no, not that lame question again.”

    So, I would say the writer of this post is not reporting a truly surprising fact about the lack of clarity that these marchers might have in their purposes. People don’t behave out of clarity so much as out of reflex.
    What’s the reflex here? That’s a question that I leave for your speculation.

    The less clarity that a word has, the more marchers who can stand behind it. For example, if the slogan were March for Cliodynamics or March for Computational Social Science or March for Recombinant Memetics, then I doubt that very many people would show up.

  50. Love all your stuff, Willis. And this is excellent advice, which will be ignored. Pass the special Earth Day popcorn!

  51. I searched the NYT website for “John Bates” and got nothing. Meanwhile a physiologist post-doc from a health center I have never heard of is some big leader of science worthy of mention in a NYT article. We aren’t talking about an endowed professor of physics at Yale, we are talking about a post-doc at a medical center. Not a climate researcher, a physiologist who can’t get a real job. JC the world is upside down.

  52. [quote]And here’s the best part. This is the message of the lecture from the scientific elite—we plebes, as well as the “people making decisions in Washington”, are either not smart enough to recognize evidence when we see it, or we are deliberately ignoring evidence.[/quote]
    See: The Emperor’s New Clothes. “Evidence” = “Clothes”, only smart man can see it!

  53. Clearly, Climate Change doesn’t have a theme .. no “We Are The World” or “Do They Know It’s Christmas?”

    As it is … I give it a 0 because I can hear it or dance to it

  54. Willis, I noticed that the Sierra Club was being represented at the La Guardia protests on immigration. So I imagine that the Southern Center on Law and Poverty will be well represented in the “scientist march”

  55. “No food riots in the streets.”

    The real irony about that comment of yours is this: The closest thing we DID have to “food riots” was the result NOT of crop failures due to “global warming,” but rather due to the diversion of food crops to use in “bio fuel” production aimed at solving non-existent “climate” problems.

  56. https://www.sigmaxi.org/news/article/2017/02/03/sigma-xi-becomes-a-partner-with-the-march-for-science

    There may be another going down. The last issue of American Scientist had an editorial about “Post Truth” inviting comments. As a decades long time member, even with an award from a local chapter, I wrote them a letter ending with a positive suggestion of producing an article on logical errors. There was also an article about communication. I fear they are edging, maybe falling, off the cliff. They still have many good articles, but have been avoiding the controversial ones.

    • I forgot to mention the irony that American Scientist has been covering the EPA Flint water mess. They may meet themselves coming and going.

  57. It seems to me that a very corrupt establishment/governance regime is desperately trying to resist the uncovering of the ugly truths that will, if uncovered, land a great many ostensibly respectable people in prison . . rather than the lap of luxury they had anticipated. And, that we are seeing various “authority figures” like scientists in the generic sense, being paraded before the corrupt mass media lenses so as to generate the impression that the people who are now in a position to uncover many of those ugly truths are considered untrustworthy/disreputable themselves, by various generic authority figure types . . because prison sucks.

  58. ‘being against something is not sufficient’ – absolutely right!

    This is the same as the Brexit referendum where the line taken by all those advocating a vote of ‘remain’ spent all their time telling us how terrible things would become if we voted to leave. Not once did anyone give any argument that being in the EU was wonderful because dah dah dah… They were all AGAINST leaving but no positive reasons for staying were given. So Cameron lost, just as Hillary lost later in the year.

    • Same came to Italy with “Constitutional Referendum”. It’s seemed that the world’s end came the day after No’s victory. “No” won and the world is still here! Fortunately this was political only not scientific claim, but the communication rules are the same.

Comments are closed.