The Republican War on Science Continues --- OPEN DISCUSSION

[gfm7175]

Good ol' Owl... The Liberal pathogen has infected her quite severely, I'm afraid... Pulling this one out of the 'Chamber of Echos' for open discussion... Here is Owl's OP in its entirety...

"WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is preparing to significantly limit the scientific and medical research that the government can use to determine public health regulations, overriding protests from scientists and physicians who say the new rule would undermine the scientific underpinnings of government policymaking.

A new draft of the Environmental Protection Agency proposal, titled Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science, would require that scientists disclose all of their raw data, including confidential medical records, before the agency could consider an academic study’s conclusions. E.P.A. officials called the plan a step toward transparency and said the disclosure of raw data would allow conclusions to be verified independently."
***
"Public health experts warned that studies that have been used for decades — to show, for example, that mercury from power plants impairs brain development, or that lead in paint dust is tied to behavioral disorders in children — might be inadmissible when existing regulations come up for renewal.

For instance, a groundbreaking 1993 Harvard University project that definitively linked polluted air to premature deaths, currently the foundation of the nation’s air-quality laws, could become inadmissible. When gathering data for their research, known as the Six Cities study, scientists signed confidentiality agreements to track the private medical and occupational histories of more than 22,000 people in six cities. They combined that personal data with home air-quality data to study the link between chronic exposure to air pollution and mortality.

But the fossil fuel industry and some Republican lawmakers have long criticized the analysis and a similar study by the American Cancer Society, saying the underlying data sets of both were never made public, preventing independent analysis of the conclusions."

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/11/c...nce-trump.html

[gfm7175]

Here, we see yet another prime example of someone who is completely unable to form argumentation on their own, thus they must rely on other people to form their arguments for them.

"WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is preparing to significantly limit the scientific and medical research that the government can use to determine public health regulations, overriding protests from scientists and physicians who say the new rule would undermine the scientific underpinnings of government policymaking.

Legislation is not science.

A new draft of the Environmental Protection Agency proposal, titled Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science, would require that scientists disclose all of their raw data, including confidential medical records, before the agency could consider an academic study’s conclusions.

Yes, raw data is important. Statistical Mathematics REQUIRES the use of raw data for any statistical summary.

But the fossil fuel industry and some Republican lawmakers have long criticized the analysis and a similar study by the American Cancer Society, saying the underlying data sets of both were never made public, preventing independent analysis of the conclusions."

Yes, that is an issue.

There is no such thing as the "fossil fuel industry". We do not use fossils for fuel. There are many better fuel alternatives, such as coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, hydro.....

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/11/c...nce-trump.html

Learn how to form your own arguments, instead of regurgitating what the NY Times says...

[ThatOwlWoman]

I hope someone will come play in your sandbox with you, poor thing.

Today, 10:44 AM
gfm7175
Verified User

This message is hidden because gfm7175 is on your ignore list.

Today, 11:13 AM
gfm7175
Verified User

This message is hidden because gfm7175 is on your ignore list.

[Cypress]

.................................................. .....

The reason you are not invited to discuss science with sentient beings, is because you are arrogant and uninformed enough to claim you know more about science than the prestigious U.S. National Academies of Sciences.

>> https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...53#post2947253

[gfm7175]

I suppose one way of replacing the elderly in your base who are passing away

Bigotry. There are Republicans of all ages.

is to make new supporters by exposing the young to IQ-impairing lead, mercury, pollutants, asbestos, etc. eh?

Exposing people to lead, mercury, etc. makes them vote Republican?? WTF??

We have to get this evil creature out of our White House before he causes any more damage.

Now you're resorting to dehumanizing Trump, eh? Nah, he is a human, all the same.

What "damage" has he caused?

[gfm7175]

I have always felt conservative's most admirable contribution to scientific inquiry is the prestigious Creation Science Museum in beautiful Petersburg, Kentucky

Mostly religion.

[gfm7175]

The people that once tried to keep the ship afloat have all left the White House.

Which "people" are you referring to?

This poor idiot is now at the Helm all by himself.

Insult Fallacy. Trump has many people surrounding and advising him, actually.

(We are now at the Mercy of God)

Just now?? Not anytime prior to now?

[gfm7175]

My dad was a scientist

I don't believe you.

and most of our neighbors (all transferred to the St. Louis area by their employer) were as well.

I don't believe you.

Back then (R)s supported science and scientific research.

They still do.

Scientific R&D was seen as one of our best weapons against the USSR. It was the anti-establishment left who condemned companies like Dow, Monsanto, Boeing, Standard Oil, etc. for developing war materiel and destroying the environment.

What destruction of the environment?

Science was looked on with suspicion and hatred by many on the left.

It still is.

Now it's totally reversed.

Nope, nothing has changed.

[gfm7175]

They might disdain science and technology in the abstract,

Nope, that's the Liberals. Inversion Fallacy.

but I haven't noticed any lack of conservative enjoyment of the products that science and tech bring us, have you?

Both conservatives and liberals tend to enjoy the technological advances that we have made.

They don't go to church instead of the ER when they're having an MI.

The church and the ER serve two different purposes.

They all seem to have cell phones, flat screen TVs, newer cars, Internet, cable.

Yup. So do liberals, thanks to capitalism. What's your point?

They definitely breathe the same clean air and drink the same clean water the rest of us do.

Yup. So do liberals, thanks to capitalism. What's your point?

Well, for now. I wonder how many brain-damaged children, burning rivers, and carcinomas will be needed for them to see the light?

Children are/become brain-damaged for numerous reasons. I thought your thread was about science... Why are you discussing religion??

[gfm7175]

I thought this thread was about the "Republican war on science"?? Instead, it's been mainly Trump bashing and Christian bashing... What does any of that have to do with science?? I digress...

Everything about this administration reeks.

Everything? Trump passing the 'Right to Try' bill is something that "reeks"?? Trump bringing troops back home "reeks"?? The record-setting lowering of unemployment rates "reeks"? A booming economy and stock market "reeks"? C'mon now...

Thankfully it will all be over soon,

What will be over soon?

albeit after quite a bit of damage to society.

What "damage to society"??

[gfm7175]

Let's hope most of the damage can be mitigated by keeping his insane orders tied up in the courts till sanity can resume.

What "damage"?? What "insane orders"?? The court system is not an Oligarchy. Define "sanity".

[gfm7175]

He's stacked the courts pretty well. Certain demographics were warned about the '16 election, and the courts. They couldn't be bothered to vote because....Sanders.

The DNC sure fucked him over, didn't they?

[gfm7175]

I hope someone will come play in your sandbox with you, poor thing.

Today, 10:44 AM
gfm7175
Verified User

This message is hidden because gfm7175 is on your ignore list.

Today, 11:13 AM
gfm7175
Verified User

This message is hidden because gfm7175 is on your ignore list.

No worries. Since I have now created this open discussion thread, your echo chamber thread will be dead in no time...

[gfm7175]

The reason you are not invited to discuss science with sentient beings, is because you are arrogant and uninformed enough to claim you know more about science than the prestigious U.S. National Academies of Sciences.

>> https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...53#post2947253

I DO know more about science than the USNAS. I've told you this many times. I'm not going to back down from my claim.

[domer76]

Here, we see yet another prime example of someone who is completely unable to form argumentation on their own, thus they must rely on other people to form their arguments for them.


Legislation is not science.


Yes, raw data is important. Statistical Mathematics REQUIRES the use of raw data for any statistical summary.


Yes, that is an issue.

There is no such thing as the "fossil fuel industry". We do not use fossils for fuel. There are many better fuel alternatives, such as coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear, hydro.....


Learn how to form your own arguments, instead of regurgitating what the NY Times says...

Dang! You just earned the stupid post of the day.