Posted on Mar 16, 2017
Trump’s budget calls for seismic disruption in medical and science research
3.16K
53
54
8
8
0
I find it hard to understand what the anti-intellectuals think that they will accomplish by slashing funding to arts and sciences, only to turn around and promote what is essentially corporate/religious propaganda (creationism, climate denial, etc). If they think that this will promote innovation and push the US to the top, they'll likely not live long enough to see the consequences of this policy.
Trump’s budget calls for seismic disruption in medical and science research
Posted from washingtonpost.com
Donald Trump
Republicans
Science
Government
Education
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 20
5
5
0
I like his budget proposal. It fully aligns with the promises he made on the campaign trail. It's almost... as if...he's representing his constituency! *gasp*
Despite the continued gnashing of teeth, medical and science research will continue under Corporate, University and Private funding, Bert and Ernie (Elmo for you young folks) will continue to make millions under their contracts with HBO, and the Smithsonian Institute ran for years on private funding, so they won't be closing their doors anytime soon.
Despite the continued gnashing of teeth, medical and science research will continue under Corporate, University and Private funding, Bert and Ernie (Elmo for you young folks) will continue to make millions under their contracts with HBO, and the Smithsonian Institute ran for years on private funding, so they won't be closing their doors anytime soon.
(5)
(0)
4
4
0
Doesn't mean that research has to stop. It just puts the impetus on private companies and their research departments. Who said this was the responsibility of the Federal Gov't?
(4)
(0)
CW4 Guy Butler
Probably because basic research (and that's what we're talking about here) is probably the most boring money hole you can drop dollars into - right up to the point there's a breakthrough.
That's where private companies jump on board and dump money into applied research, which actually can show a profit.
http://www.sjsu.edu/people/fred.prochaska/courses/ScWk170/s0/Basic-vs.-Applied-Research.pdf
That's where private companies jump on board and dump money into applied research, which actually can show a profit.
http://www.sjsu.edu/people/fred.prochaska/courses/ScWk170/s0/Basic-vs.-Applied-Research.pdf
(2)
(0)
4
4
0
SPC Jesse Davis
CPT (Join to see) -
When the reality of science is 'progressive agenda', then it becomes a problem with your own ideological culture. Science is only political because certain ideologies have problems accepting inconvenient facts. Case in point: Evolution and climate.
When the reality of science is 'progressive agenda', then it becomes a problem with your own ideological culture. Science is only political because certain ideologies have problems accepting inconvenient facts. Case in point: Evolution and climate.
(1)
(0)
SPC Jesse Davis
PO1 John Crafton -
It becomes 'pseudo' when the science is fallible or otherwise wrong based on it's own merits. When the only objection you have to a finding is on raw ideological/faith/personal grounds, then they are of absolutely 0 relevance to the veracity of said science.
Your opinion does not matter. If you want to address problems with science, you need to address the actual science, not whine about the consequences that findings have for your belief system.
It becomes 'pseudo' when the science is fallible or otherwise wrong based on it's own merits. When the only objection you have to a finding is on raw ideological/faith/personal grounds, then they are of absolutely 0 relevance to the veracity of said science.
Your opinion does not matter. If you want to address problems with science, you need to address the actual science, not whine about the consequences that findings have for your belief system.
(1)
(0)
SPC Jesse Davis
You haven't 'addressed the science' if the only thing you have to present is political objection to something that is distinctly apolitical. Fundamental misunderstanding of how this research is conducted and presented is not an argument.
The IPCC is an international community of scientists from across the world, collaborating between rival nations even, near-unanimously attesting to the reality of their observations - with all of said data presented to the public for full transparency. You will need more than raw incredulity, world-spanning conspiracies, or getting offended at your opinion not being valued, to discount that work.
I don't even know where to start on creationism. That is almost flat-earth territory.
The IPCC is an international community of scientists from across the world, collaborating between rival nations even, near-unanimously attesting to the reality of their observations - with all of said data presented to the public for full transparency. You will need more than raw incredulity, world-spanning conspiracies, or getting offended at your opinion not being valued, to discount that work.
I don't even know where to start on creationism. That is almost flat-earth territory.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google