From the I've-heard-enough-and-won't-take-it-anymore department, http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-39024648
The BBC reports that former Congressman Rush Holt, now part of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), is the spokesman for a movement "standing up for science".
His remarks reflect growing concern among researchers that science is disregarded by President Trump.
Scientists across the US plan to march in DC on 22 April.
[...] "To see young scientists, older scientists, the general public speaking up for the idea of science. We are going to work with our members and affiliated organisations to see that this march for science is a success."
Mr Holt made his comments at the AAAS annual meting in Boston as President Trump appointed a fierce critic of the Environmental Protection Agency as its head. Scott Pruitt has spent years fighting the role and reach of the EPA.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by looorg on Tuesday February 21 2017, @02:33PM
Oh Look it's another anti-Trump rally this time disguised as being "for science." Starting to get a tad old these days but I guess this is what we have to look forward to for the next 4-8 years while the tears from Queen Hillary loosing the election dries out among her supporters.
(Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Tuesday February 21 2017, @02:47PM
That, and the same reasons why people like me cannot afford to own homes in towns we grew up in. The EPA and local variant of it have so many restrictions on what land can even be used that it shrinks the supply of it, raising prices. Yet they are powerless to stop the springtime chainsaw brigades from mowing down the shaded part of the nice walkable streets. All for what? So a few frogs can live in the already-polluted waterways that are overloaded because there's no trees left to soak up the water?
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 21 2017, @02:54PM
Wow now that is a new one. The EPA isn't the real problem behind your inability to buy a house, it is more about the state of wealth distribution. Maybe it should be illegal for any one entity to own thousands of homes in order to turn people into serfs? As for the environment, maybe it contributes a bit to lack of cheaper housing, but would you really trade the future of a sustainable ecosystem for a tiny drop in housing prices?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 21 2017, @05:07PM
Calm down, take a deep breath. Wasn't that nice that you could do that without coughing?
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 21 2017, @02:49PM
Well if Trump wasn't hell bent on denying important scientific facts in order to increase profits then this would be a different story. As it is there is no reason a protest can't be both. As for the "tears from Queen Hillary", that is a tired response from a special snowflake who wants everyone to stop being mean to "their guy."
(Score: 2) by looorg on Tuesday February 21 2017, @03:03PM
Was there months of protests when McCain and later Romney lost to Obama? Day after day of crying in the media and parts of the public? I can't recall any massive demonstrations against Obama winning the election what so ever. What we are seeing now is just the worst kind of sore losers that can't get over the defeat. All about the feelings.
On that note he isn't really "my guy". I didn't vote since I'm not a citizen. But sure I admit I would have voted for Trump over Hillary if I could have voted. He was clearly the better option. But I wouldn't have been crying about it if he lost.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 21 2017, @03:12PM
Selective memory, or not being a citizen you just didn't pay enough attention? There were plenty of people screaming about Obama for all 8 years, and if you can't see how Trump's first month in office is beyond scary, how he is already failing on promises and leading us toward disaster, then please keep your comments to yourself. This is not about hurt feelings, that is a real life meme being used to sweep dissent under the rug.
The astroturfing is real folks.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by looorg on Tuesday February 21 2017, @03:33PM
I wasn't saying there wasn't people screaming bloody murder about Obama for 8 years, calling him Obongo, that whole thing about him being a secret muslim, being born in America or not, people not being ecstatic about Obamacare or whatever. I recall that to. What I said was that there was no massive demonstrations every week right after he got into office from the people that lost. At least non that I can recall. But if you can dig some up some info on those that would be awesome. Clearly I have been missing out.
People that don't agree with you should STFU and keep their comments to themselves? That is rich coming from an AC coward. So you decide the opinions that are allowed to be expressed? Is this the democracy where you are just allowed to express what you think if you agree with you? Nice. The people that did vote for Trump clearly didn't like the country the way it was, they clearly wanted something else. They sucked it up when your guy was in the office. At least you could have the decency to do the same.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 21 2017, @03:48PM
A professional troll you are, they hand out playbooks during orientation?
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday February 21 2017, @04:17PM
Before I say anything else, let me clearly note that I am NOT nor have I EVER been a Hillary Clinton supporter. You can check comments I made here before the election to confirm that I severely criticized both major parties and both major candidates. Nevertheless, I also viewed (and still view) Trump as a worse choice among the major party candidates.
That said, I also think you're missing some points about what's going on now.
I wasn't saying there wasn't people screaming bloody murder about Obama for 8 years, calling him Obongo, that whole thing about him being a secret muslim, being born in America or not, people not being ecstatic about Obamacare or whatever.
You do realize that most of that is stuff that was spearheaded by our current President, right? A guy who went out of his way to promote blatant lies about the previous President's ethnicity, birthplace, family, religion, etc.? Basically, for a number of years, we were treated to Trump's declarations against the previous President that were on the level of an elementary school playground yelling "yo mama" jokes. We might have to go back to the early 19th century in U.S. politics to find that level of BS shouted at political opponents (and I'm not sure even then).
So, can you at least comprehend why previous supporters of Obama might be at least slightly more offended at the transition to the new President than opponents were after previous inaugurations?? I mean, the guy spent the past several years essentially hurling nasty personal insults at the leader of their party.
Personally, I think the protests are a bit overdone too -- and frankly, I think they actually play into Trump's strategy -- but I completely understand them and why people are upset. It isn't over being a "sore loser" -- it's the fact that we've elected a known bully and liar.
People that don't agree with you should STFU and keep their comments to themselves? [...] The people that did vote for Trump clearly didn't like the country the way it was, they clearly wanted something else. They sucked it up when your guy was in the office. At least you could have the decency to do the same.
Wow -- the amount of hypocrisy displayed in a single paragraph. You complain that AC wants you to be quiet, which you think is an affront to free speech, but just a few sentences later you argue that your opponents "could have the decency" to shut up themselves.
I don't even know what to say in response to that.
(Oh, and by the way, I completely support your right to speak your mind here, and you should. Just as these protesters apparently are, whether or not I agree with their strategy.)
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday February 21 2017, @05:17PM
A guy who went out of his way to promote blatant lies about the previous President's ethnicity, birthplace, family, religion, etc.?
There's a hilarious section of one of the debates where he skewers Hillary because he was doing that out of a favor to one of her minor functionaries. Names and places and details are called out... then that whole topic was kinda dropped from the campaign by the media because it made her look so bad. It is kinda funny that before she was his primary enemy, he was doing her favors, but that's politics for you.
Now only in the Democratic party could you have your own sec of state working against you by getting a billionaire to make fun of you as a sitting president, which is kinda funny. That party is soooo dysfunctional its often comedic. I mean you can't even make a sitcom about the Democrats because people would think it either non-fiction or unbelievable.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 21 2017, @06:17PM
Provided for the peanut gallery: Snopes [snopes.com].
(Score: 2) by art guerrilla on Tuesday February 21 2017, @07:24PM
a meta-comment about snopes...
i used to -not *depend* on them, but- consult them regularly for stupid shit i heard or saw online or wherever, and i would kind of get a reasonable cut at the credibility of that 'thing' from snopes...
but then i read a couple of their run downs on some issues/stuff (can't remember what, think one of them was about drones) where i think i had a little deeper knowledge, and they were being disingenuous, to say the least... (i know, a blog being disingenuous; jello sue-prees, as the froggies croak...)
also saw a couple 'debunked' stories which seemed to be substantially true, but they made some technical dissembling about it to call it 'untrue' or 'unlikely', or 'unproven' or some such mealy-mouthed claptrap...
don't run to them much anymore...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday February 22 2017, @04:00AM
^ This. Snopes has a liberal slant to their "fact checking". Snopes isn't going to say or do anything that might harm a progressive candidate.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 22 2017, @03:46AM
"on the level of an elementary school playground yelling "yo mama" jokes."
Watch it now. Yo mama jokes are constitutionally protected. Yo mama jokes are almost sacred. You don't want to be branded as an SJW, so go easy on the sophomoric humor, alright?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 22 2017, @03:58AM
Washington maintained morale at Valley Forge with stand-up routines that included yo mama jokes.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday February 22 2017, @03:49AM
VLM nailed it. That whole birther movement originated from the Clinton camp. Don't attribute to Trump what Hillary started. I'm running late, or I'd find a citation for you. Late 2006 to mid 2007, one of Hillary's top aides sent inquiries to important people, asking them to check into Obama's credentials, and further asking them to spread the propaganda that Obama wasn't a "natural born" American. Of course, those emails were never meant to be exposed to the public.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 22 2017, @08:37AM
So Trump is actually working for Hillary?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday February 22 2017, @09:26AM
You do realize that most of that is stuff that was spearheaded by our current President, right? A guy who went out of his way to promote blatant lies about the previous President's ethnicity, birthplace, family, religion, etc.? Basically, for a number of years, we were treated to Trump's declarations against the previous President that were on the level of an elementary school playground yelling "yo mama" jokes. We might have to go back to the early 19th century in U.S. politics to find that level of BS shouted at political opponents (and I'm not sure even then).
I'd care more if President Obama wasn't a shitty president. Getting replaced by a Twitter blowhard is only part of the humiliation that Obama and his followers have earned. I supposed if it were to happen to me, I'd be a little sore too - assuming I was paying enough attention to this fluff to care. But not burning a car sore.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 21 2017, @03:18PM
Oh no there was just the birther movement, the obsession with his race or his religion, the resurgence of white supremacy groups, and a whole hell of a lot of praying something happens to the man so he's no longer living let alone being Presidential. Before the results where in there where many more than will care to admit that felt if Clinton won it was time to break out the revolution! Not an MLK style social revolution but actual warfare. Go take a long walk off a short pier. Leave the adults to clean up this mess.
(Score: 3, Touché) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday February 21 2017, @05:24PM
We can't let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided!
Donald J Trump, referring to Obama's win in 2012.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday February 21 2017, @03:05PM
hell bent on denying important scientific facts in order to increase profits
As such a major activity of his, it should be very easy to generate a large and long list of very high impact actions, yet...
Note that nobody is saying there should not be "commie scientists social signalling for superiority against trump" marches or political action groups.
People are mostly making fun of the above political action committee appropriating all of science. "All of science against everything trump ever" LOL yeah sure ha ha funny. Oh how brave those marchers are, LOL.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 21 2017, @03:26PM
Heh, the "people mostly making fun of" are two users so far, and only this last comment focused on the AAAS speaking for all science. Having been around for over 150 years and being one of the largest groups of scientists I will have to say that isn't a far-out claim. And "commie scientists social signaling for superiority" are you for real with that???
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday February 21 2017, @09:51PM
Yes, he is as deadly serious as an Ebola plague. Stop expecting your fellow humans to be rational; very often they are not.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Informative) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Tuesday February 21 2017, @03:51PM
April 22nd happens to be Earth day.
Rally may have happened without Trump.
However, because of Trump, there is some renewed urgency.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Wednesday February 22 2017, @04:24AM
Yea... and Earth Day is also the date of something else important in the Progressive world. There is a reason we on the right distrust the modern enviros and call them watermelons.
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Wednesday February 22 2017, @07:48AM
Green on the outside, Republican on the inside?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by q.kontinuum on Tuesday February 21 2017, @05:26PM
Interestingly, nearly any rally for any moral- or otherwise worthy cause nowadays is implicitly an unti-trump rally. Trump is just evidently wrong on so many issues, he should be right more often just by chance if he picked randomized concatenation of words.
Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum