PDA

View Full Version : March for Science



Gorn
2017-Jul-10, 03:08 AM
Hello. I know there was a March for Science recently. But I also think what is needed is not just a March for Science but
a Woodstock. Anyone agree or disagree?

Any and all comments welcome

Bye
G

WaxRubiks
2017-Jul-10, 03:30 AM
http://orig08.deviantart.net/dd0a/f/2008/220/b/4/yasgur__s_farm_by_petalspice.jpg

Well I've got a guitar.

Noclevername
2017-Jul-10, 04:30 AM
Disagree. Woodstock was a large party to promote popular music, with protest as a side dish. The MFS was done to promote science and education, or more specifically a reaction against cultural and political attempts to degrade and demean science and education.

Torsten
2017-Jul-10, 08:19 AM
Attend a conference.

slang
2017-Jul-10, 01:48 PM
I know you guys are very careful not to get anywhere near the political connotations of the aforementioned journey on foot. Right? Thanks. :)

R.A.F.
2017-Jul-10, 01:51 PM
Any and all comments welcome

Bacon??

mkline55
2017-Jul-10, 02:16 PM
A march for science makes as much sense as a march for geometry or the number pi. Oh look! Here comes the pre calculus group with their slide rules.

I can imagine black hole enthusiasts holding a march, but both of them would get more attention if they marched for bacon instead.

R.A.F.
2017-Jul-10, 02:20 PM
A march for science makes as much sense as a march for geometry or the number pi.

What would your response be if you were told that geometry and pi were wrong?

mkline55
2017-Jul-10, 02:37 PM
What would your response be if you were told that geometry and pi were wrong?

Hurray!

R.A.F.
2017-Jul-10, 02:51 PM
Hurray!

Flippant answer to serious question, noted.

mkline55
2017-Jul-10, 05:51 PM
Flippant answer to serious question, noted.

I welcome people with open minds who question science. Science is rarely 100% factual and accurate, and it's good to hear from people who do not behave like mindless drones and instead can think for themselves, even if they fly in the face or normality. So the answer was not intended to be flippant. It was a short answer to avoid this longer explanation, which I felt would be a distraction to the original question.

R.A.F.
2017-Jul-10, 08:26 PM
I welcome people with open minds who question science.

Questioning is one thing...ignoring available evidence to forward a personal agenda is not.



Science is rarely 100% factual and accurate...

Unless you have an "alternative" that has a better success rate, this statement is ridiculous.



...and it's good to hear from people who do not behave like mindless drones and instead can think for themselves, even if they fly in the face or normality.

So following the scientific method to arrive at a rational conclusion, is "mindless"??


Good to know just where your head is at...I can now respond accordingly...

Gorn
2017-Jul-11, 01:40 AM
No where 'near' big enough!

Gorn
2017-Jul-11, 03:42 AM
Remember I am never thinking of 'rebellion'..more..koom-bye-ya.

G

WaxRubiks
2017-Jul-11, 08:53 AM
I welcome people with open minds who question science. Science is rarely 100% factual and accurate, and it's good to hear from people who do not behave like mindless drones and instead can think for themselves, even if they fly in the face or normality. So the answer was not intended to be flippant. It was a short answer to avoid this longer explanation, which I felt would be a distraction to the original question.

it depends why they are questioning it. If it due to some dogmatic belief for example the Wallace and Gromit cult who believe the moon is made of cheese, then that is't very openminded, necessarily.

Jens
2017-Jul-11, 09:34 AM
I can imagine black hole enthusiasts holding a march, but both of them would get more attention if they marched for bacon instead.

It wouldn't be very effective, because no information would get out. Or would it?

Noclevername
2017-Jul-11, 09:54 AM
A march for science makes as much sense as a march for geometry or the number pi. Oh look! Here comes the pre calculus group with their slide rules.

I can imagine black hole enthusiasts holding a march, but both of them would get more attention if they marched for bacon instead.

The march, as I said above, was to promote science and scientific thinking in a society that increasingly values neither.

reject
2017-Jul-11, 11:08 AM
It wouldn't be very effective, because no information would get out.

I was too slow!

reject
2017-Jul-11, 11:09 AM
The march, as I said above, was to promote science and scientific thinking in a society that increasingly values neither.

Did it have that effect?

Noclevername
2017-Jul-11, 11:17 AM
Did it have that effect?

How can I judge that?

Jim
2017-Jul-11, 11:19 AM
It wouldn't be very effective, because no information would get out. Or would it?

I think there might be some spontaneously generated information at the visible edges of the march.

reject
2017-Jul-11, 11:40 AM
How can I judge that?

Use the scientific method.

Noclevername
2017-Jul-11, 11:49 AM
Use the scientific method.

Expand on this, please. Specific actions?

mkline55
2017-Jul-11, 11:57 AM
So following the scientific method to arrive at a rational conclusion, is "mindless"??

Quite the opposite. It's sad that I would have to explain my comment any further. The mindless ones are those who can pass through science courses and quote answers from books without any real understanding of what leads to those answers and who could never arrive at the answers themselves. For example, ask a classroom of students how many know the shape of an orbit is elliptical. Count the hands. Then ask those to write down in their own words how they would go about deriving the formula for an ellipse. The ones with no clue are the ones I refer to as mindless drones. They can repeat information, but they cannot deduce it for themselves.


Good to know just where your head is at...I can now respond accordingly...

Why the attitude?

mkline55
2017-Jul-11, 12:00 PM
Expand on this, please. Specific actions?

I think he means something like setting up a control group which does not see the march and a group which sees the march. Test them prior to the march for their scientific attitude/aptitude. Then test them afterwards and compare the results.

WaxRubiks
2017-Jul-11, 12:03 PM
Quite the opposite. It's sad that I would have to explain my comment any further. The mindless ones are those who can pass through science courses and quote answers from books without any real understanding of what leads to those answers and who could never arrive at the answers themselves. For example, ask a classroom of students how many know the shape of an orbit is elliptical. Count the hands. Then ask those to write down in their own words how they would go about deriving the formula for an ellipse. The ones with no clue are the ones I refer to as mindless drones. They can repeat information, but they cannot deduce it for themselves.





Yes, I agree...humans are so proud of their intelligence, and people are generally intelligent, but who came up with the things around us? I was thinking about my curtains for example...who came up with weaving, or knitting all those thousands of years ago? Something like cloth, most people take for granted, but whoever they were, they were geniuses....likewise with most of the things around us.

WaxRubiks
2017-Jul-11, 12:05 PM
I think he means something like setting up a control group which does not see the march and a group which sees the march. Test them prior to the march for their scientific attitude/aptitude. Then test them afterwards and compare the results.

yes, that may be what he means...,but there is no way to really test, scientifically, the effect our actions have on the universe...the test itself would be one of those actions.

The Backroad Astronomer
2017-Jul-11, 12:22 PM
My problem with the march for science is what about the other months.

WaxRubiks
2017-Jul-11, 12:29 PM
My problem with the march for science is what about the other months.

well I think there's a goldmine in alchemy, if only the money was put into rearch.

Jens
2017-Jul-11, 12:29 PM
I think there might be some spontaneously generated information at the visible edges of the march.

Yes, and then there was the march that Heisenberg led. They knew where they were marching, but had no idea how fast they were going.

WaxRubiks
2017-Jul-11, 12:31 PM
Yes, and then there was the march that Heisenberg led. They knew where they were marching, but had no idea how fast they were going.

it didn't matter though, it was the principle that mattered.

reject
2017-Jul-11, 12:34 PM
I think he means something like setting up a control group which does not see the march and a group which sees the march. Test them prior to the march for their scientific attitude/aptitude. Then test them afterwards and compare the results.

Well, something along those lines would be one method, although far from the only method.


yes, that may be what he means...,but there is no way to really test, scientifically, the effect our actions have on the universe...the test itself would be one of those actions.

There are entire disciplines devoted entirely to that. Of course some of the methods have to be a bit different (for example, it's often harder to run controlled experiments in social contexts).

Our actions have included large scale vaccination programmes. Is there no way to test whether those have had any effect on the prevalence of the diseases they target, or do we tell the anti-vaxxers, "hey, you might be right, we have no way to tell"?

Our actions have also included burning a large amount of carbon-based compounds to produce energy. It is my understanding that at this particular board, someone who wants to claim that this has had no effect on earth's climate is relegated to a ghetto where they are subjected to forcible interrogation and other severe measures. Is this treatment based on superstition, since we have no way of telling whether our actions have had an effect?

But, f there's no way to tell whether a "March For Science" has the slightest effect in curing the ill it is supposed to, why even have it? If I ask whether "March for Science" is more effective than "Cast a Voodoo Spell for Science", is the collective answer here "we don't know, and we have no way of knowing"? How about "Kill a Scientist for Science"? Do we have no way to measure the effectiveness of that one?

R.A.F.
2017-Jul-11, 12:50 PM
It's sad that I would have to explain my comment any further.

It's sad that your posts can so easily be misinterpretated.


The mindless ones are those who can pass through science courses and quote answers from books without any real understanding of what leads to those answers and who could never arrive at the answers themselves.

I'd rather have "mindless ones", than have people actively trying to tear down science education for political gain.



Why the attitude?

IMO, this is a very serious subject, and distractions serve no purpose.

Given time, there will be no need to worry about kids lazily learning science by rote. Soon there will be no science taught at all...


Problem solved. :)

WaxRubiks
2017-Jul-11, 01:15 PM
Well, something along those lines would be one method, although far from the only method.



There are entire disciplines devoted entirely to that. Of course some of the methods have to be a bit different (for example, it's often harder to run controlled experiments in social contexts).

Our actions have included large scale vaccination programmes. Is there no way to test whether those have had any effect on the prevalence of the diseases they target, or do we tell the anti-vaxxers, "hey, you might be right, we have no way to tell"?

Our actions have also included burning a large amount of carbon-based compounds to produce energy. It is my understanding that at this particular board, someone who wants to claim that this has had no effect on earth's climate is relegated to a ghetto where they are subjected to forcible interrogation and other severe measures. Is this treatment based on superstition, since we have no way of telling whether our actions have had an effect?

But, f there's no way to tell whether a "March For Science" has the slightest effect in curing the ill it is supposed to, why even have it? If I ask whether "March for Science" is more effective than "Cast a Voodoo Spell for Science", is the collective answer here "we don't know, and we have no way of knowing"? How about "Kill a Scientist for Science"? Do we have no way to measure the effectiveness of that one?

yes, I meant the sum total of our actions, sorry, not individual actions. We can gauge the effects we have to a small or large degree, depending on our actions. If I were thinking of punched a heavyweight boxer in the street, I'd know, in the short term, some of the effects of that action; if I flap my arms about for ten seconds, I will have less idea, a la the butterfly effect.

mkline55
2017-Jul-11, 02:32 PM
, this is a very serious subject, and distractions serve no purpose.

In my opinion, the march for science was a distraction with a purely political motivation. More marches, and a Woodstock-type event would just be more distractions.

Gillianren
2017-Jul-11, 03:51 PM
Quite the opposite. It's sad that I would have to explain my comment any further. The mindless ones are those who can pass through science courses and quote answers from books without any real understanding of what leads to those answers and who could never arrive at the answers themselves. For example, ask a classroom of students how many know the shape of an orbit is elliptical. Count the hands. Then ask those to write down in their own words how they would go about deriving the formula for an ellipse. The ones with no clue are the ones I refer to as mindless drones. They can repeat information, but they cannot deduce it for themselves.

I can't make that calculation. That doesn't make me mindless. I'm aware that calculation exists. I'm aware it's been done by probably many millions of people over the years. But I don't have the necessary data. Because it's not my field. I can talk to you all day about primary sources and what they say about, for example, causes of the Civil War. I can write a poem, an essay, a novel, a play, or any number of other kinds of writing--and have. Heck, I can write a song and develop the harmony myself. I can do a whole lot of things. But because we are necessarily a civilization of specialists, no, I can't tell you how to derive a formula. Sorry if that offends.

R.A.F.
2017-Jul-11, 04:07 PM
In my opinion, the march for science was a distraction with a purely political motivation.

Yeah, because science is such a debatable subject...it's not like there are actual evidences to back up scientific ideas.


Science is not political, except when misused for political gain.

That this is fine with you, scares the hell out of me...

mkline55
2017-Jul-11, 04:07 PM
I can't make that calculation. That doesn't make me mindless. I'm aware that calculation exists. I'm aware it's been done by probably many millions of people over the years. But I don't have the necessary data. Because it's not my field. I can talk to you all day about primary sources and what they say about, for example, causes of the Civil War. I can write a poem, an essay, a novel, a play, or any number of other kinds of writing--and have. Heck, I can write a song and develop the harmony myself. I can do a whole lot of things. But because we are necessarily a civilization of specialists, no, I can't tell you how to derive a formula. Sorry if that offends.

I asked, "How would you go about deriving the formula". I did not ask anyone to derive the formula. The difference is whether you can understand that there's more to science than the printed answers. A lot had to happen to arrive at those answers. A correct response to the request is exactly what you gave. You know you need more data. You know there's a way. You have an idea what it takes to get the answer besides just quoting it. That's the whole point. You are far more likely to ask/understand that the velocity of the orbiting object changes as it moves around the ellipse than someone who is stuck with just the ellipse answer.

Gillianren
2017-Jul-12, 03:57 PM
I wouldn't go about deriving the formula. I don't know how to derive a formula.

Swift
2017-Jul-12, 09:30 PM
Yes, this is in purple (moderator colors), and it is for everyone....

The event in the US called The March for Science, and which took place in Washington, DC and other cities around the world was very much a political event (I know, I was there). As such, particulars about that event, the reasons for it, the results of it, etc., are not appropriate topics for CQ. Specific references to that event need to stop, or this thread will be closed (with or without infractions).

If you want to discuss generally the promotion or advocacy of science, that's fine, as long as it stays out of politics, and as long as it remains polite (which some contributors seem to be struggling with).