There's one scene where he's trying to make a
case against the science experts where he doesn't even put together ONE coherent sentence.
The story flew
against all science on the matter and it was rare that the front section — also known as the mainstream — asked me for anything.
We fight for scientists and defend scientific integrity by exposing and challenging these
attacks against science to preserve academic freedom and prevent manipulation of public policy.
But there, too, longstanding divisions — most shaped by economics —
cut against a science - driven solution.
In a sense this is also bigotry,
bigotry against science that you just don't like because it disagrees with your «traditional» views.
Today, for the third and hopefully for the final time, an exhaustive independent review has exposed as unfounded the overwhelming thrust of the
allegations against our science.
There is a concerted attempt to cut sensible climate policy off at the knees by building a popular online
movement against the science itself.
I happen to think money for science is great, but when it is
used against science, that is where things go wrong.
Already, the forces of climate change inaction were sharpening their rhetorical weapons in preparation for retrenchment in the
war against the science of climate change — the «climate wars».
The coming year is expected to see Virginia's Republican attorney general, Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II — who is known for his
crusade against the science of man - made global warming — try to win the governor's seat over Democrat Terry McAuliffe.
His
argument against science funding (and science in general) seems to follow arguments made by other prominent Trump transition team figures: because science is sometimes wrong, or not clear cut, it shouldn't be trusted.
Imagine where the world would be had Exxon continued to pursue and embrace its advanced scientific understanding of climate change decades ago, rather than pivoting antagonistically
against the science by funding decades of denial?
For in fact, the myth that the Church
battles against science lies not in Christianity itself, but in the supposed conflict between the Christian religionand science.»
The British Chiropractic Association (BCA) has abandoned its controversial libel action
against science writer Simon Singh.
From The Guardian, a recent study comparing literary
fiction against science fiction returned rather «stupefying» results.
Heartland has established itself as a coordinator of climate denial efforts, as a publisher of a discredited pseudo-scientific attack on climate science called the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, and as organizer of a conference that brings together groups and individuals that
work against the science and policy of climate change.
This abysmal failure to show us all absolute evidence of illicit money exchanged for fabricated, demonstratively false science papers / assessments is the proverbial «mathematical certainty «that dooms the accusation, and places the whole idea of man - caused global warming in peril of sinking if its promoters can not defend their
position against science - based criticism from skeptic scientists.
Whenever one needs to fill an empty page, magazines are quick to run a story about the «persecution» of Galileo and the «fight» of the
Church against science.
Larger examples are the jihads against Professor Roger Pielke Jr. (here, here, and here), Roger Pielke Sr., and Dr. Judith Curry... This problem appears to be growing worse, as greens become increasingly
active against science whose conclusions they do not like — as the left becomes increasingly active on colleges suppressing speech they do not like (recent examples: calls to fire Professor Scott Yenor at Boise State U).
So... if my choices are Adam and Eve and a talking snake, and Noah, and all the other extremely unscientifically silly fairy
tales against science, my intellect compels me to believe the scientific community.
Christians have been
against science in the beginning because science always ends up proving a strange occurrence has nothing to do with God at all and can be explained with science.
I was not turning my
back against science, but against the dominant worldview derived from science called mechanism or materialism.
You appear to be a victim of the (largely successful) misinformation campaign waged by parts of the religious
community against science.
Be on
guard against science without humanity, Politics without principle, Knowledge without character, Wealth without work, Commerce without morality, Pleasure without conscience, And worship without sacrifice.