Scientific Interference By Us Government

[Dubh Aingeal]

According to the BBC, the American Union of Concerned Scientists has put out a statement about the misrepresentation of date and a list of such interference by the U.S. government in scientific research. Besides the usual slew of Nobel Laureate signatories, they provide a number of examples besides the well-known example of the EPA's Global Warming Report.

From the BBC article:

It's very difficult to make good public policy without good science, and it's even harder to make good public policy with bad science,' said Dr Peter Gleick, president of the Pacific Institute for Studies in Development, Environment and Security. 'In the last several years, we've seen an increase in both the misuse of science and I would say an increase of bad science in a number of very important issues; for example, in global climate change, international peace and security, and water resources.

[pharoh]

Ditto

[Zenji]

Science is the new religion. Or rather old religion was just science. It's all the same thing. Just like in the old days we make policy based on scientific gatherings that become law and truth regardless of application.

That's why we can have shit like the Pluto incident. If you have enough people that believe and agree that something is a way other than what was once publically believed and agreed upon, you rewrite history, you rewrite science, and you invent truth and reality as you go. Read any religious book.

[BrassFusion]

Science is the new religion. Or rather old religion was just science. It's all the same thing. Just like in the old days we make policy based on scientific gatherings that become law and truth regardless of application.

That's why we can have shit like the Pluto incident. If you have enough people that believe and agree that something is a way other than what was once publically believed and agreed upon, you rewrite history, you rewrite science, and you invent truth and reality as you go. Read any religious book.

What are you talking about? The Pluto debacle is more about what characteristics define the term "planet" than anything else. No one's been saying that Pluto behaves differently than we've known for the past 30-50 years.

[Zenji]

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Pluto was once named a planet. Now modern science has redefined the characteristics necesarry for a planet to be recognized. Pluto doesn't fit the "new scientific classification" and so now it's no longer considered a planet. It's the same system of change that's being talked about in the thread.

My point is that what we consider scientific method today is being used as Religion (and to a great degree Philosophy) was used back in the dark ages. We write a science book, that's reality, that's the truth. Back in those days they didn't just write science books, they wrote science fiction, called it a religion and it was law, it was the truth.

We're talking about how science has shaped history and the world and how it can change our present reality. We're talking about how good science and bad science is used as propaganda to influence all aspects of reality from politics, religion, cultures and anything really.

[BrassFusion]

Now modern science has redefined the characteristics necesarry for a planet to be recognized.

They didn't "redefine" it, they just DEFINED it, because it wasn't definite before recently. This is an issue of terminology, not really of science, and definitely not of "reality" overall.

Are you one of those people who's bitter about "losing" Pluto?

[Head Wreck]

pluto was denied its planet status as it didnt extradite any terrorists in hiding to GWB.

[BrassFusion]

pluto was denied its planet status as it didnt extradite any terrorists in hiding to GWB.

Now THAT makes you wonder...