The Naked Scientists
Toggle navigation
Login
Register
Podcasts
The Naked Scientists
eLife
Naked Genetics
Naked Astronomy
In short
Naked Neuroscience
Ask! The Naked Scientists
Question of the Week
Archive
Video
SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
Articles
Science News
Features
Interviews
Answers to Science Questions
Get Naked
Donate
Do an Experiment
Science Forum
Ask a Question
About
Meet the team
Our Sponsors
Site Map
Contact us
User menu
Login
Register
Search
Home
Help
Search
Tags
Member Map
Recent Topics
Login
Register
Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side
New Theories
War on Science
« previous
next »
Print
Pages:
1
2
[
3
]
Go Down
War on Science
43 Replies
21184 Views
0 Tags
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
DoctorBeaver
Naked Science Forum GOD!
12653
Activity:
0%
Thanked: 4 times
A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
War on Science
«
Reply #40 on:
09/10/2007 17:48:48 »
Quote from: dkv on 09/10/2007 08:42:22
DOnt value this thread and you persih.
Oooh, I'm so scared I'm going to buy more toilet paper
Logged
kdlynn
Naked Science Forum King!
2851
Activity:
0%
Thanked: 2 times
Re: War on Science
«
Reply #41 on:
10/10/2007 03:27:02 »
strangely enough, dkv, you were once again asked a direct, clear, and reasonable question and you have failed to answer except with more gibberish...
Logged
pete_inthehills
Full Member
50
Activity:
0%
War on Science
«
Reply #42 on:
10/10/2007 11:56:59 »
I was always amused by those folk who wanted to put a sticker on any books explaining evolution. The sticker would say "this is just one theory of how the world was created".
To be fair, then the religious books should also have a sticker saying "this is just one theory of how the world is created."
pete
inthehill
Logged
johnbrandy
Jr. Member
43
Activity:
0%
War on Science
«
Reply #43 on:
12/11/2007 04:22:50 »
So call scientific facts are provisional, any reputable scientist will tell you this. Global warming is not the only issue. Reducing all forms of pollution, which no one considers healthy, is. Who wants to wait for definitive evidence of global warming? Is it not reasonable to reduce air borne pollution. Much of the fish that we catch is not safe to eat. Who do we think we are fooling? The entire planet is largely polluted. Scientific investigation is a global phenomenon, which no administration can long deny. Moreover, public awareness will demand change. I believe, in the long run, environmental science will prevail. As to what science in certain areas can pursue, this is a sensitive issue. Hopefully, enlightened dialog will decide what is reasonable. As a society, we are not especially enlightened, in my view. As such, we must elect enlightened representatives at all levels if we hope to turn this situation around. Or become such enlightened leaders. Can you suggest a better solution?
Logged
Print
Pages:
1
2
[
3
]
Go Up
« previous
next »
Tags:
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...