M41 F33
whos marching for science?
January 28 2017
Comments
-
chevtrek
8 years ago
If I could I would tell the truth about what the GOV does.
-
Mischeviouslad
8 years ago
🤔 - Posted from rhpmobile
-
RHP User
8 years ago
That's probably your best bet for beginning with your LinkedIn Contacts - Posted from rhpmobile
-
RHP User
8 years ago
I'm just gonna sit on my recliner at home after a hard days work....suck down a bourbon and flip every cunt off lol :p
-
MadhattersCat
8 years ago
My daughter has just been excepted for a double degree in Bio Chemistry and Neuroscience i am marching hard for science. (oh - we have already had the Breaking Bad conversation about how her skills and my network could be profitable. Her response ?? "Yeah Dad" - with quality sarcasm - so proud !!)
-
Mischeviouslad
8 years ago
Don't forget your tinfoil hat! 🤓 - Posted from rhpmobile
-
RHP User
8 years ago
I would if I lived in Washington
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Quoting 'happy_fun' My daughter has just been excepted for a double degree in Bio Chemistry and Neuroscience i am marching hard for science. (oh - we have already had the Breaking Bad conversation about how her skills and my network could be profitable. Her response ?? "Yeah Dad" - with quality sarcasm - so proud !!) thats brilliant, well done! and regarding the washington comment, there are marches being organised globally. yes, even a little ol perth one check it out on facebook @marchforscienceperthwa
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Hahahaha - Posted from rhpmobile
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Had a quick google, can't see anything for Perth, but if there was, then I would.
-
yankmychain56
8 years ago
I suppose you are talking about Al Gore and his global warming scam. the 'inconvenient truth' is he lied and got filthy dirty rich off doing it. Not sure if you kept up when he first started with his 'the sky is falling' rant, but back when it was really rolling, the ice caps were already supposed to be gone by 2013. I recall reading an article about how the ice caps were going to melt within 20 years, sea levels would rise and flood the cities, and cause world-wide chaos that would destroy all life on earth. That was a report written in 1929.'science' can be twisted to political agendas just like anything else. These 'scientists' can be bought and be corrupt scumbags just like anyone else, and the true scientists are slandered and shamed in to silence when they raise the alarm about the data being fudged to fit a global elitist agenda for CONTROL of PEOPLE. The bottom line is Al Gore is an egomaniac. he lost the election, demanded a recount, and lost again, so stormed off to get the attention he craved so much and started his own global warming death cult. so on that note, I will just leave this right here.
-
RHP User
8 years ago
but I live in One Nation supporter heartland so guarantee there won't be any pro-science marches happening here.
-
madotara69
8 years ago
We recently attended the swap meet for home built space ships, specifically with the intension for seeking a reasonably stable Flux Compacitor, and the interests were remarkably positive in a sharing way, unfortunately only Flux Capacitors were offered as a cheap alternative, that Flux sux, it's simply no option in this instance, bummer. Mado Mado Tara xx
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Quoting 'yankmychain56' I suppose you are talking about Al Gore and his global warming scam. the 'inconvenient truth' is he lied and got filthy dirty rich off doing it. Not sure if you kept up when he first started with his 'the sky is falling' rant, but back when it was really rolling, the ice caps were already supposed to be gone by 2013. I recall reading an article about how the ice caps were going to melt within 20 years, sea levels would rise and flood the cities, and cause world-wide chaos that would destroy all life on earth. That was a report written in 1929.'science' can be twisted to political agendas just like anything else. These 'scientists' can be bought and be corrupt scumbags just like anyone else, and the true scientists are slandered and shamed in to silence when they raise the alarm about the data being fudged to fit a global elitist agenda for CONTROL of PEOPLE. The bottom line is Al Gore is an egomaniac. he lost the election, demanded a recount, and lost again, so stormed off to get the attention he craved so much and started his own global warming death cult. so on that note, I will just leave this right here. Because the scientific community at large would never tell any politician they were full of shit if they were talking nonsense science? There were noted errors in the movie - the shrinkage of Kilimanjaro was due to deforestation effects, but the evidence that the previous theory was wrong came out AFTER the movie. There was a graph wrongly attributed. Some of the messages were political rather than scientific, some things stated were a overly dramatic - but the central core of the movie, and the science presented was solid. It's fine to not like Al Gore, but that doesn't mean that the science he promoted was not true. (I'd also note that you're communicating with us over a medium which Gore had a large hand in bringing about - he wrote the bill that opened up ARPANET to become the internet, and funded the NCSA which created Mosaic which directly resulted in Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox, and then pushing for internet access for all) I'll tell you what is junk science promulgated by leftist politicians and a global elite for control of the proletariat? Evolution. What a load of nonsense, I've never seen anything evolve, if creatures could evolve to suit conditions - why are they going extinct all the time? It's the thin end of the wedge to get their "science" agenda into the school system and control the hearts and minds of the sheeple who make the workforce of tomorrow Because Alternative Facts
-
RHP User
8 years ago
And then there's vaccination, communism in action, whatever happened to survival of the fittest ?
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Al Gore didn't march for science but he did march in uniform.
-
RHP User
8 years ago
I actually met a guy who thought that immunisations were injecting you with micro computers into your bloodstream to control and/or bug/track you. And you have to have repeated injections every so often because... updates. Forget whether vaccinations are or are not good for your health, this is the REAL conspiracy. Should you even bother trying to debate someone on this point? Should be media be giving this view equal time? Should we say the evidence "is not settled" on this topic? There is still a flat earth society. Some people unfortunately will believe whatever they want.. If you want to believe the earth is flat, that the stated laws of physics are all lies (Dr Karl is the DEVIL), that the world map is much different and world trade and international transportation systems (and fake photos of a global earth) are all collectively hiding the truth in a global... sorry... world wide conspiracy, then they can believe that if that what helps them sleep at night. Sometimes, you just have to let people be wrong. The problem arises when anti-science becomes mainstream and we start throwing people of cliffs again to see if they are witches. Science says that idea is stupid, but what do those corrupt scientists know? I put my faith in young people and new generations. Just like burning witches, society is generally progressive. We don't do those things anymore because... science. Just like acceptance of the lgbti community, newer/younger generations understand that science shows they are not abominations as cited from some ancient religious textbook. Now choose your people to debate. Do you want to debate on climate change, vaccination, water flouridation, earth shape/size etc, the laws of physics, the existence of supernatural beings, evolution, who built the pyramids, when the world will end, whether smoking causes cancer, does suncreen really prevent cancer, did we go to the moon etc etc etc. I have come across people who believe against the 90-99% of established science on all those points. But trying to constantly convince the other side of various arguments is almost impossible especially when they are flat-out deniers and name-callers, and just adds to stress and anxiety to your own life. I realise and empathise with the real, hard working scientists that have to engage with all these arguments and on all these topics and more, despite the fact it would obviously do their head in.
-
yankmychain56
8 years ago
He got filthy rich off of people that hate big corporations ripping them off. As far as him 'inventing the internet', he really didn't 'invent' it. He was in the navy and they wanted a secure method of transmitting data quickly from point A to point B, so Al Gore and a team of other people were put on it. The system was already in place, but was not a world-wide web, which is what they we tasked with putting together.As far as global warming, there is no possible way they can predict anything with any accuracy with less than 30 years of any accurate data, and about 100 years of accurate weather keeping records. Compare that to the eons of time, and it just isn't possible.There is a fine line between real science, and science fiction.Science is a tool, not a religious belief, which many people treat it as.If you question any 'sceintific' discoveries or 'data', you are branded a heretic.Global warming and also evolution will fall in to that category. Any ethical scientist will tell you the theory of evolution has more holes in it than swiss cheese, it is just the best theory they have.
-
RHP User
8 years ago
Just because some dude may have lied about some things to do with climate change in order to enrich themselves it does not mean that climate change is not a potential problem and it would not be wise to take some steps to mitigate or avoid it. And, if this even needs to be said, it does not mean that science itself is faulty or invalid. Such intolerance to ambiguity is exactly the same mode of thinking that religion uses. The ability to accept being wrong and to reassess when new evidence and observations come to light is the reason why science is not a religion. Yankyourchain, it appears that your only evidence that climate change is a scam is one dude made a documentary on the subject which contain alleged inaccuracies (I've never seen it) and used this to get rich. Have you spent the 97 minutes the doco in question runs for reading about climate change research from an alternative source in order to balance your opinion somewhat? These sciency people you want to disagree with (because its not just Al Gore) have spent a fair amount of time and effort understanding the climate system and measuring and recording it. Have you reviewed their work too? You allege a global conspiracy by political elites to control the people. Have you thought critically about what actions either side of the debate are suggesting? Find and develop alternative energy sources to hydrocarbons vs. continue to increase our use of hydrocarbons as an energy source in an unconstrained fashion. Do you realize who are the main players getting rich of hydrocarbons? (hint: elite). Have you applied the typical conspiracy theory test of Cui bono to determine the true motivations/motivators of a conspiracy as opposed to the ostensible? Have you considered this Gore character may be an agent provocateur for the elites to discredit climate change research so they can continue getting rich by selling hydrocarbons as an energy source and that you yourself have been pawned into furthering this agenda?
-
madotara69
8 years ago
The polar ice caps don't have massive blue lakes from melt water and the Stuff ain't slipping into the oceans a bit quicker and the core samples of ice don't show worrying amounts of carbon and Al Gore was already rich 'An Inconvenient Truth' Seems he may just have got that right.
-
RHP User
8 years ago
I can't quote as I'm on my iPad. Yankmychain: I specifically avoided the old "Al Gore invented the Internet" line, and specifically stated what he was involved in. It seems like a shitty attempt at gas lighting when the fact of what was said is right up there on the page. As for the climate, we do have good indicators of historical weather patterns, they're captured in easily dated items such as tree rings, ice cores, coral cores, etc. Is your disagreement with climate change predictions based on environmental records not being recorded for long enough? What's it based on? (No, I'm not asking for peer reviewed articles, I do acknowledge that there can be bias preventing publication or that not all journal worthy science ends up in a journal) I'm intrigued as to what your argument against evolution is, why, and if you have a competing theory?
-
RHP User
8 years ago
I might just don my walking shoes. The work needs to be shared not silenced. Science requires a global and collaborative approach. In addition the immigration changes will have impacts on the information shared, and science evolving simply put. I've been following the Standing Rock and DAPL debacle for a while now. Heritage, enivonmental impact, politics, the need for resources and money all fighting for progress/cessation. Standing Rock represents a very small section of the pipeline, but has raised global awareness of a much bigger issue. Sometimes many voices are needed to educate the public and turn on conscience.
Boards
-
Hot Topics
Topics: 14361 Comments: 120840
-
Girls Ask
Topics: 1355 Comments: 14709
-
Guys Ask
Topics: 2425 Comments: 17234
-
Couples' Corner
Topics: 2405 Comments: 12737
-
Swingers Lifestyle
Topics: 794 Comments: 5154
-
Fetish & Fantasy
Topics: 1148 Comments: 6957
-
Hot Travel
Topics: 622 Comments: 2145
-
LGBT
Topics: 156 Comments: 1150
Forum help
-
Something related with that
-
Going somewhere & want to hook up?
-
Hasn't that topic been posted before?
RHP's popular dating tool
-
Where the heck did that topic go?
Discover what RHP is doing offline
-
RHP member's RL secrets
reply
like
Share