MAGA- please explain…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The scientific method is a systematic process used to acquire knowledge through observation, experimentation, and analysis. It typically involves forming a hypothesis, conducting experiments to test that hypothesis, and refining it based on the results."


That's not what is going on. Lifers in government are studying ways to push forward their democrat ideologies. HTH

And you base this claim on what exactly?

Proclamations like the world is going to end and the seas will boil if we don't switch from oil to renewable energy from the DNC and all its affinity groups.

Thus, all studies going against that message are buried and unpublished, and all studies in favor of it show up in the NY Times, WAPO and the mainstream media.

Large industries are set up with artifically induced government grants from universities to put forth that message through targeted studies and private industry is heavily subsidized to roll it out.

Don't tell us it's not happening. Everyone sees it.

The world is switching over. Oil is a finite dead end. We just have to endure about 3.25 more years of the moron-in-chief before we can work to get back on track.

So you admit, you're using political science to promote your agenda. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The scientific method is a systematic process used to acquire knowledge through observation, experimentation, and analysis. It typically involves forming a hypothesis, conducting experiments to test that hypothesis, and refining it based on the results."


That's not what is going on. Lifers in government are studying ways to push forward their democrat ideologies. HTH

And you base this claim on what exactly?

Proclamations like the world is going to end and the seas will boil if we don't switch from oil to renewable energy from the DNC and all its affinity groups.

Thus, all studies going against that message are buried and unpublished, and all studies in favor of it show up in the NY Times, WAPO and the mainstream media.

Large industries are set up with artifically induced government grants from universities to put forth that message through targeted studies and private industry is heavily subsidized to roll it out.

Don't tell us it's not happening. Everyone sees it.

Where is the evidence of this?

Global temperatures ARE rising and we ARE seeing the effects. Every developed country in the world besides the U.S. acknowledges this.

How do you know all dissenting studies are being buried? Who told you? Was it Fox News?

You know what industry also gets a ton of support from the government? Oil and coal. But you don’t believe that is a problem? Why? How is it different than renewable energy in that respect.

Moreover, the push for renewable energy didn’t occur until decades after scientific consensus emerged about the threat of climate change. But, somehow, you believe this is all a conspiracy by scientists across the globe to falsify evidence decades in advance in order to create an industry that would allow completely unrelated people to benefit from the U.S. government’s meager tax incentives? You are not that stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The scientific method is a systematic process used to acquire knowledge through observation, experimentation, and analysis. It typically involves forming a hypothesis, conducting experiments to test that hypothesis, and refining it based on the results."


That's not what is going on. Lifers in government are studying ways to push forward their democrat ideologies. HTH

And you base this claim on what exactly?

Proclamations like the world is going to end and the seas will boil if we don't switch from oil to renewable energy from the DNC and all its affinity groups.

Thus, all studies going against that message are buried and unpublished, and all studies in favor of it show up in the NY Times, WAPO and the mainstream media.

Large industries are set up with artifically induced government grants from universities to put forth that message through targeted studies and private industry is heavily subsidized to roll it out.

Don't tell us it's not happening. Everyone sees it.

The world is switching over. Oil is a finite dead end. We just have to endure about 3.25 more years of the moron-in-chief before we can work to get back on track.

So you admit, you're using political science to promote your agenda. Thank you.

How is that an admission of “using political science to promote [an] agenda”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The scientific method is a systematic process used to acquire knowledge through observation, experimentation, and analysis. It typically involves forming a hypothesis, conducting experiments to test that hypothesis, and refining it based on the results."


That's not what is going on. Lifers in government are studying ways to push forward their democrat ideologies. HTH

And you base this claim on what exactly?

Proclamations like the world is going to end and the seas will boil if we don't switch from oil to renewable energy from the DNC and all its affinity groups.

Thus, all studies going against that message are buried and unpublished, and all studies in favor of it show up in the NY Times, WAPO and the mainstream media.

Large industries are set up with artifically induced government grants from universities to put forth that message through targeted studies and private industry is heavily subsidized to roll it out.

Don't tell us it's not happening. Everyone sees it.

The world is switching over. Oil is a finite dead end. We just have to endure about 3.25 more years of the moron-in-chief before we can work to get back on track.

So you admit, you're using political science to promote your agenda. Thank you.

I mean if this is your takeaway, fine. You get to benefit from scientific advancement like all your other fellow morons. You’re posting on a message board. This is your entirely irrelevant contribution to the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAGA- please explain to me why you are against science research? I’m so confused by this. Do you never intend to use any products that were developed via scientific research or never go to a doctor?

Democrats have turned science into political science.

If you don't see it, you don't see it.

So you’re against scientific research? You didn’t actually answer OP’s question. What about scientific research conducted in other countries? Do you also not believe that?

I told you, it's not scientific research. It's political science. Get it now?

So you decided to just play the part of moronic troll. Yes, we get it now.

Stop opening threads with "MAGA- please explain…" if you don't like to hear the truth.

Oh, and F your climate change redistribution of income scam. It's being systematically destroyed by Trump. Good!

Trump and the Republicans are redistributing from the middle and lower class to the rich with their tariff scam. You seem to have no problem with that. F that - I'm all for redistributing wealth in the other direction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAGA- please explain to me why you are against science research? I’m so confused by this. Do you never intend to use any products that were developed via scientific research or never go to a doctor?

Democrats have turned science into political science.

If you don't see it, you don't see it.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Government is definitely not perfect but it does do (or did) some GREAT things, like funding novel scientific research that private corporations won't touch because that baseline research is almost never profitable.

One thing the feds could clean up is not having political appointees so deep down in government. Leave them at the top. Let merit staff manage the rest.

Politicizing science means government is not perfect? That's your defense?

Maybe you need to switch the term government with the DNC.

We're seriously infested with leftist ideology. RIp it out, root and branch.

No, we are not infested. And it's not a defense. It's a rational observation based on decades of personal experience. My son with type 1 diabetes benefits from the continuous glucose monitor patch he wears and monitor on from an app on his phone. The very early research on whether enzyme based electrodes could measure glucose levels was funded by the federal government, back in the 60s and the 70s. Private companies like Abbott and Dexcom took the research after certain breakthroughs were made and developed the commercial product we use today. They profit from federal research foundational funding.

By killing research funding, we've set research back by decades. Maybe my son could have grown up to just take one pill a day that stops the auto immune attack on his pancreas. How amazing would that be? Especially for kids born 30 years from now, who wouldn't have to have needles stuck into them with the Omnipod, especially during sports. Don't get me wrong, the Omnipod is amazing. So much better than what was available when I was a kid.

And that's just it. We were making great advances in many different things over the years. No longer. We will rely on research in other nations, but they are not funded as well as we were. So much for American exceptionalism.

We're not well funded. We have a national debt of $110,000 for every person in the country. *

We're borrowing or creating out of thin-air, 50 cents of every dollar that the government spends, at our present rate.

Every dollar created brings on more inflation. Sorry to tell you, but we're out of runway.

Let private industry do the research and pay for it.

* https://www.usdebtclock.org/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAGA- please explain to me why you are against science research? I’m so confused by this. Do you never intend to use any products that were developed via scientific research or never go to a doctor?

Democrats have turned science into political science.

If you don't see it, you don't see it.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Government is definitely not perfect but it does do (or did) some GREAT things, like funding novel scientific research that private corporations won't touch because that baseline research is almost never profitable.

One thing the feds could clean up is not having political appointees so deep down in government. Leave them at the top. Let merit staff manage the rest.

Politicizing science means government is not perfect? That's your defense?

Maybe you need to switch the term government with the DNC.

We're seriously infested with leftist ideology. RIp it out, root and branch.

No, we are not infested. And it's not a defense. It's a rational observation based on decades of personal experience. My son with type 1 diabetes benefits from the continuous glucose monitor patch he wears and monitor on from an app on his phone. The very early research on whether enzyme based electrodes could measure glucose levels was funded by the federal government, back in the 60s and the 70s. Private companies like Abbott and Dexcom took the research after certain breakthroughs were made and developed the commercial product we use today. They profit from federal research foundational funding.

By killing research funding, we've set research back by decades. Maybe my son could have grown up to just take one pill a day that stops the auto immune attack on his pancreas. How amazing would that be? Especially for kids born 30 years from now, who wouldn't have to have needles stuck into them with the Omnipod, especially during sports. Don't get me wrong, the Omnipod is amazing. So much better than what was available when I was a kid.

And that's just it. We were making great advances in many different things over the years. No longer. We will rely on research in other nations, but they are not funded as well as we were. So much for American exceptionalism.

We're not well funded. We have a national debt of $110,000 for every person in the country. *

We're borrowing or creating out of thin-air, 50 cents of every dollar that the government spends, at our present rate.

Every dollar created brings on more inflation. Sorry to tell you, but we're out of runway.

Let private industry do the research and pay for it.

* https://www.usdebtclock.org/

That’s not how inflation works.

[Anonymous]

Not a conservative at all and also a scientist so this is just a guess.
Scientific research has not been kind to the underprivileged and people of color. Historically, it has led to a distrust of doctors and the medical community.
Additionally, research is often spoken about serving a small percentage of the population. The well has been poisoned by studies addressing some small issue with those that they deem unworthy - women, trans, etc.
Again, just a guess. I don't get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not a conservative at all and also a scientist so this is just a guess.
Scientific research has not been kind to the underprivileged and people of color. Historically, it has led to a distrust of doctors and the medical community.
Additionally, research is often spoken about serving a small percentage of the population. The well has been poisoned by studies addressing some small issue with those that they deem unworthy - women, trans, etc.
Again, just a guess. I don't get it.

This is valid, but MAGA had no issue with science until scientists started saying things Trump didn’t like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAGA- please explain to me why you are against science research? I’m so confused by this. Do you never intend to use any products that were developed via scientific research or never go to a doctor?

Democrats have turned science into political science.

If you don't see it, you don't see it.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Government is definitely not perfect but it does do (or did) some GREAT things, like funding novel scientific research that private corporations won't touch because that baseline research is almost never profitable.

One thing the feds could clean up is not having political appointees so deep down in government. Leave them at the top. Let merit staff manage the rest.

Politicizing science means government is not perfect? That's your defense?

Maybe you need to switch the term government with the DNC.

We're seriously infested with leftist ideology. RIp it out, root and branch.

No, we are not infested. And it's not a defense. It's a rational observation based on decades of personal experience. My son with type 1 diabetes benefits from the continuous glucose monitor patch he wears and monitor on from an app on his phone. The very early research on whether enzyme based electrodes could measure glucose levels was funded by the federal government, back in the 60s and the 70s. Private companies like Abbott and Dexcom took the research after certain breakthroughs were made and developed the commercial product we use today. They profit from federal research foundational funding.

By killing research funding, we've set research back by decades. Maybe my son could have grown up to just take one pill a day that stops the auto immune attack on his pancreas. How amazing would that be? Especially for kids born 30 years from now, who wouldn't have to have needles stuck into them with the Omnipod, especially during sports. Don't get me wrong, the Omnipod is amazing. So much better than what was available when I was a kid.

And that's just it. We were making great advances in many different things over the years. No longer. We will rely on research in other nations, but they are not funded as well as we were. So much for American exceptionalism.

We're not well funded. We have a national debt of $110,000 for every person in the country. *

We're borrowing or creating out of thin-air, 50 cents of every dollar that the government spends, at our present rate.

Every dollar created brings on more inflation. Sorry to tell you, but we're out of runway.

Let private industry do the research and pay for it.

* https://www.usdebtclock.org/

That’s not how inflation works.

That's exactly how inflation works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAGA- please explain to me why you are against science research? I’m so confused by this. Do you never intend to use any products that were developed via scientific research or never go to a doctor?

Democrats have turned science into political science.

If you don't see it, you don't see it.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Government is definitely not perfect but it does do (or did) some GREAT things, like funding novel scientific research that private corporations won't touch because that baseline research is almost never profitable.

One thing the feds could clean up is not having political appointees so deep down in government. Leave them at the top. Let merit staff manage the rest.

Politicizing science means government is not perfect? That's your defense?

Maybe you need to switch the term government with the DNC.

We're seriously infested with leftist ideology. RIp it out, root and branch.

No, we are not infested. And it's not a defense. It's a rational observation based on decades of personal experience. My son with type 1 diabetes benefits from the continuous glucose monitor patch he wears and monitor on from an app on his phone. The very early research on whether enzyme based electrodes could measure glucose levels was funded by the federal government, back in the 60s and the 70s. Private companies like Abbott and Dexcom took the research after certain breakthroughs were made and developed the commercial product we use today. They profit from federal research foundational funding.

By killing research funding, we've set research back by decades. Maybe my son could have grown up to just take one pill a day that stops the auto immune attack on his pancreas. How amazing would that be? Especially for kids born 30 years from now, who wouldn't have to have needles stuck into them with the Omnipod, especially during sports. Don't get me wrong, the Omnipod is amazing. So much better than what was available when I was a kid.

And that's just it. We were making great advances in many different things over the years. No longer. We will rely on research in other nations, but they are not funded as well as we were. So much for American exceptionalism.

We're not well funded. We have a national debt of $110,000 for every person in the country. *

We're borrowing or creating out of thin-air, 50 cents of every dollar that the government spends, at our present rate.

Every dollar created brings on more inflation. Sorry to tell you, but we're out of runway.

Let private industry do the research and pay for it.

* https://www.usdebtclock.org/

That’s not how inflation works.

That's exactly how inflation works.

Prove it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAGA- please explain to me why you are against science research? I’m so confused by this. Do you never intend to use any products that were developed via scientific research or never go to a doctor?

Democrats have turned science into political science.

If you don't see it, you don't see it.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Government is definitely not perfect but it does do (or did) some GREAT things, like funding novel scientific research that private corporations won't touch because that baseline research is almost never profitable.

One thing the feds could clean up is not having political appointees so deep down in government. Leave them at the top. Let merit staff manage the rest.

Politicizing science means government is not perfect? That's your defense?

Maybe you need to switch the term government with the DNC.

We're seriously infested with leftist ideology. RIp it out, root and branch.

No, we are not infested. And it's not a defense. It's a rational observation based on decades of personal experience. My son with type 1 diabetes benefits from the continuous glucose monitor patch he wears and monitor on from an app on his phone. The very early research on whether enzyme based electrodes could measure glucose levels was funded by the federal government, back in the 60s and the 70s. Private companies like Abbott and Dexcom took the research after certain breakthroughs were made and developed the commercial product we use today. They profit from federal research foundational funding.

By killing research funding, we've set research back by decades. Maybe my son could have grown up to just take one pill a day that stops the auto immune attack on his pancreas. How amazing would that be? Especially for kids born 30 years from now, who wouldn't have to have needles stuck into them with the Omnipod, especially during sports. Don't get me wrong, the Omnipod is amazing. So much better than what was available when I was a kid.

And that's just it. We were making great advances in many different things over the years. No longer. We will rely on research in other nations, but they are not funded as well as we were. So much for American exceptionalism.

We're not well funded. We have a national debt of $110,000 for every person in the country. *

We're borrowing or creating out of thin-air, 50 cents of every dollar that the government spends, at our present rate.

Every dollar created brings on more inflation. Sorry to tell you, but we're out of runway.

Let private industry do the research and pay for it.

* https://www.usdebtclock.org/

That’s not how inflation works.

That's exactly how inflation works.

Prove it.

It's not my job to teach your f'n dumb ass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAGA- please explain to me why you are against science research? I’m so confused by this. Do you never intend to use any products that were developed via scientific research or never go to a doctor?

Democrats have turned science into political science.

If you don't see it, you don't see it.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Government is definitely not perfect but it does do (or did) some GREAT things, like funding novel scientific research that private corporations won't touch because that baseline research is almost never profitable.

One thing the feds could clean up is not having political appointees so deep down in government. Leave them at the top. Let merit staff manage the rest.

Politicizing science means government is not perfect? That's your defense?

Maybe you need to switch the term government with the DNC.

We're seriously infested with leftist ideology. RIp it out, root and branch.

No, we are not infested. And it's not a defense. It's a rational observation based on decades of personal experience. My son with type 1 diabetes benefits from the continuous glucose monitor patch he wears and monitor on from an app on his phone. The very early research on whether enzyme based electrodes could measure glucose levels was funded by the federal government, back in the 60s and the 70s. Private companies like Abbott and Dexcom took the research after certain breakthroughs were made and developed the commercial product we use today. They profit from federal research foundational funding.

By killing research funding, we've set research back by decades. Maybe my son could have grown up to just take one pill a day that stops the auto immune attack on his pancreas. How amazing would that be? Especially for kids born 30 years from now, who wouldn't have to have needles stuck into them with the Omnipod, especially during sports. Don't get me wrong, the Omnipod is amazing. So much better than what was available when I was a kid.

And that's just it. We were making great advances in many different things over the years. No longer. We will rely on research in other nations, but they are not funded as well as we were. So much for American exceptionalism.

We're not well funded. We have a national debt of $110,000 for every person in the country. *

We're borrowing or creating out of thin-air, 50 cents of every dollar that the government spends, at our present rate.

Every dollar created brings on more inflation. Sorry to tell you, but we're out of runway.

Let private industry do the research and pay for it.

* https://www.usdebtclock.org/

That’s not how inflation works.

That's exactly how inflation works.

Prove it.

It's not my job to teach your f'n dumb ass.

So you can’t. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MAGA- please explain to me why you are against science research? I’m so confused by this. Do you never intend to use any products that were developed via scientific research or never go to a doctor?

Democrats have turned science into political science.

If you don't see it, you don't see it.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Government is definitely not perfect but it does do (or did) some GREAT things, like funding novel scientific research that private corporations won't touch because that baseline research is almost never profitable.

One thing the feds could clean up is not having political appointees so deep down in government. Leave them at the top. Let merit staff manage the rest.

Politicizing science means government is not perfect? That's your defense?

Maybe you need to switch the term government with the DNC.

We're seriously infested with leftist ideology. RIp it out, root and branch.

No, we are not infested. And it's not a defense. It's a rational observation based on decades of personal experience. My son with type 1 diabetes benefits from the continuous glucose monitor patch he wears and monitor on from an app on his phone. The very early research on whether enzyme based electrodes could measure glucose levels was funded by the federal government, back in the 60s and the 70s. Private companies like Abbott and Dexcom took the research after certain breakthroughs were made and developed the commercial product we use today. They profit from federal research foundational funding.

By killing research funding, we've set research back by decades. Maybe my son could have grown up to just take one pill a day that stops the auto immune attack on his pancreas. How amazing would that be? Especially for kids born 30 years from now, who wouldn't have to have needles stuck into them with the Omnipod, especially during sports. Don't get me wrong, the Omnipod is amazing. So much better than what was available when I was a kid.

And that's just it. We were making great advances in many different things over the years. No longer. We will rely on research in other nations, but they are not funded as well as we were. So much for American exceptionalism.

We're not well funded. We have a national debt of $110,000 for every person in the country. *

We're borrowing or creating out of thin-air, 50 cents of every dollar that the government spends, at our present rate.

Every dollar created brings on more inflation. Sorry to tell you, but we're out of runway.

Let private industry do the research and pay for it.

* https://www.usdebtclock.org/

That's not from health research. That's from unfunded, decades-long wars, and from cutting taxes. Cutting research is like me clipping my toenails in an effort to lose weight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"The scientific method is a systematic process used to acquire knowledge through observation, experimentation, and analysis. It typically involves forming a hypothesis, conducting experiments to test that hypothesis, and refining it based on the results."


That's not what is going on. Lifers in government are studying ways to push forward their democrat ideologies. HTH

No, they’re not. I’ve offered just as much evidence for my claim as you have for yours. Now prove me wrong.

You haven't provided any specifics, so I am curious: is it just SOME science you claim is politicized, or all of it? If not all of it, can you tell me what science is politicized?

Here is an example of politicized science. Anthony Mawson is the lead author of a study cited by RFK during his confirmation hearings; he concluded that vaccines are associated with increased risk of neurodevelopment disorders including autism.

Mawson published his article in an open-source online journal but it was quickly retracted after preliminary review. A year later he published it in a second online journal with a different title and it was quickly retracted again. Subsequently he published it as a Wordpress blog. The study was funded by an anti-vaccine advocacy group, whose president sued (and lost in summary judgment) Wired magazine after a Philadelphia physician commented in an interview about his frustration with movements spreading disinformation and said, "she lies."

But the article is deeply flawed from a scientific standpoint. Mawson used Medicaid billing records and self-reported outcomes from homeschool parents, comparing those who vaccinated and those who did not vaccinate their children. Among the results was that parents whose children were not vaccinated according to billing records were less likely to take their children to the doctor. Among the flaws was the assumption that kids of families in the study had only received vaccinations through Medicaid, since there are other vaccination programs. Another is the likelihood that parents who avoid vaccinations are less likely to take their children to the doctor, period, let alone receive a diagnosis. I know some of these people. If the child has a sniffle they reach for the colloidal silver. They also avoid doctors out of fear they could be reporter to CPS (these include mothers who refuse vitamin K shots for their newborns (for the rare but real risk of intracranial bleeding leading to brain damage or death, and I know at least one who refuses to have her dog vaccinated for rabies because of potential vaccine side effects). The author did not have access to actual medical records, relying instead of parents' self reports of their children's medical conditions.

You can read the rest of the study's problems here: https://theunbiasedscipod.substack.com/p/anatomy-of-a-failure-why-this-latest

So, you're right--there is a lot of politicization of science these days, mostly not where (I suspect) you think it is. Climate science? MNRA vaccines?

When you say there is politicization of science, you're saying there's stuff labeled as science that is not following scientific principles. Seems to me that this actually does you require to provide evidence. We don't, for example, have to provide that people generally obey traffic laws; we focus on those who do not.