funding chairs for gender """science""", women's studies and other leftist SJW topics was also a form of changing the face of science to strengthen a political agenda. in this sense, it was the left who began politicizing the academic world.



does he? as far as I have heard, he just wants to defund parts of the EPA and wants to restrict the kind of research on which the EPA may base their decisions. not a good move in my eyes, but something very different from "selectively defunding universities and researchers". and again, the left started actively pushing their agenda into science by selectively funding certain fields.



ofc not. but when I look at the tweets and posters of the march for science, a lot of them do not express a neutral, scientific concern about climate change - they express personal feelings towards trump. thats what I'm criticizing. there also was a lot of scientific concern expressed in a neutral way - I have no issue with this part of the protests and actually welcome it.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Apr 24 2017 07:27pm

Your body has clearly warned you. Obey the natural instinct and stop complain about the bigshots in the industry. Don't be a weakling. Be strong.

How has it warned me? I feel like crap when I stop. Sounds more like it's encouraged me.

On a related note, I get headaches if I don't have my morning coffee

Nope. You coughed the first time you tried it. Nature warned you once, twice, thrice, maybe even more times. No idiot is stupid enough to actually believe that smoking is harmless. Besides that, everyone knows smoking is harmful because society says so.

You are a weakling and a coward and you blame your deficiencies and weaknesses on business men. Take control of your life.

why don't you follow your own advice there? i did not say that you specifically stated there were only two options but i said you "acted" like it, and that's what you did.
you can try to backpedal all you want now but that's the scenario you presented as the alternative to trump's way of cutting back on environmental protection. the fact that you're trying to make this about semantics again, playing the old "well that's not exactly what i said" game just shows how uninterested you are in an intellectually honest conversation about trump's approach towards climate change and environmental protection.

you of all people talking about strawmen is just hilarious when i just exposed TWO of your major "arguments" as such: the alleged willingness of scientists that happen to oppose trump's climate change view to jail dissenters simply for dissenting AND the notion that trump's way is somehow reasonable because NOT gutting the EPA somehow means no access to affordable energy for americans (again, not explicitly but i think you are well aware of what you were trying to do there, not that i'd ever expect someone like you to admit it)...

Yes but that is because you're used to coffee. I don't drink coffee so I don't get headaches by abstaining from it.

This post was edited by Tjo on Apr 24 2017 07:29pm

It took decades of publicly funded scientific research amidst decades of deceit via privately funded pseudoscience by cigarette companies before it became common knowledge that smoking causes cancer. At least that's my understanding of the history on the subject.

This post was edited by duffman316 on Apr 24 2017 07:31pm

I don't smoke actually, but there was a time when people actually thought smoking and soda was healthy. You have a nice safe world you live in now with education and safety labels.