Scientist protest Canadian Government's Orwellian anti-Science age

[BubberMiley]

Actually, the gov't has been increasing investments in research and technology—more than $11 billion in the current budget.

When you copied and pasted that line from the Macleans article without attribution, did you not read the following paragraph that describes what that money is actually being spent on?

http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/05/03/when-science-goes-silent/

[scribblet]

Oh, poor baby, another example of HDS

[BubberMiley]

Oh, poor baby, another example of HDS

That's all you got? Name-calling? How is reading the entire article you stole from HDS?

Next time you should try writing your posts and not plagiarizing them.

Edited September 18, 2013 by BubberMiley

[Shady]

Not with this government. Policy decisions are made in the face of evidence to the contrary... which is why this government doesn't like science.

But your point still stands about access to studies/papers.

Not with any government. Non-disclosure agreements or not anything new.

[scribblet]

That's all you got? Name-calling? How is reading the entire article you stole from HDS?

Next time you should try writing your posts and not plagiarizing them.

Poor baby is name calling ? sheez I've seen a lot worse on here.

Never mind, I'd love to delve more deeply into this HDS but fortunately I'm out of here for a while... back in the future.

Edited September 18, 2013 by scribblet

[BubberMiley]

Poor baby is name calling.. sheez I've seen a lot worse.

So is accusing someone of having "HDS". And you still haven't explained why you accused me of that just for referring to the whole context of the article you plagiarized.

[On Guard for Thee]

Not with any government. Non-disclosure agreements or not anything new.

Yeah pretty new. As was stated here before, we paid for studies, we own studies. Unfortunately Harper belongs to the CAMA church which believes in part that whatever we screw up in terms of defacing the planet, God will put straight in due time, so who needs science? Now if that doesn't scare you I don't know what would.

YIKES

[G Huxley]

Hadn't heard about CAMA before. Here's some info on Stephen Harper's Cult:

http://www.macleans.ca/culture/lifestyle/article.jsp?content=20060220_121848_121848

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_and_Missionary_Alliance

[normanchateau]

The Harper government doesn't like "facts" getting in the way of their agendas. I can't believe this crap is happening in Canada in the 21st century and they're getting away with it.

The Harper War on Science extends to his inexplicable and lunatic decision to eliminate the mandatory long form census and replace it with a voluntary census. No wonder the head of Statistics Canada resigned.

[ReeferMadness]

That's not disturbing at all. In fact, it's quite logical. The government pays for the studies and the research. So any publication of said study or said research has to be approved by said government. It's works that way in government, as well as in the private sector.

I used to think that democracy was dying of apathy. Now I see that there are lots of people who are afraid of it and who just prefer authoritarian control.

[normanchateau]

So is accusing someone of having "HDS". And you still haven't explained why you accused me of that just for referring to the whole context of the article you plagiarized.

Don't expect a rational response. Those who support this government's war on science know that the best way to show their support is to deflect criticism, change the topic and engage in drive by sniping.

And while you may view plagiarism as unethical, those who support Harper's war on science may see no problem in plagiarism and misattribution. A google search reveals that Stephen Harper himself plagiarized a speech on Iraq from former Australian PM John Howard.

[DFCaper]

I was surprised to see that Elizabeth May and the Green party, who have been loud critics, seem to be no better.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/11/15/elizabeth-mays-so-called-party-of-science-seems-to-support-a-lot-of-unscientific-public-policies/

It appears that they are targeting the conspiracy theory crowd. I think it is very sad that the Green party has gone this way.

Is there any party that trusts science or is this just the effect of the system being dominated by lawyers? Not a lot of scientist politicians...

[Michael Hardner]

“Just to be clear, there has never been a single reputable, peer-reviewed study that has found any link between the consumption of genetically modified foods and adverse health effects,” he wrote.[/size]

From your link.

Maybe this internet fighting will lead to informed decisions being made by both sides based on facts, rather than ideology. One can only hope.

[TimG]

Is there any party that trusts science

I think the problem is that 'trust the science' is a useless slogan because policy decisions have to take into account many questions which science cannot answer (e.g. social values).

i.e. one may decide that it does not matter what the science says about GMOs but they go against their values and do not want to use them. The same is true of mitigation vs adaption on CO2.

I don't think this is bad but I am quite annoyed at the arrogant conceit on the part of green party and others on the left that they do not make policy choices based on values. The GMO fight shows that the greens are no different from evangelical Christians when it comes to these kinds of value based policy making. At least the Christians are honest when they push policies based on values and don't try to pretend there is a scientific justification for them.

Edited November 17, 2013 by TimG

[ReeferMadness]

I don't think this is bad but I am quite annoyed at the arrogant conceit on the part of green party and others on the left that they do not make policy choices based on values. The GMO fight shows that the greens are no different from evangelical Christians when it comes to these kinds of value based policy making. At least the Christians are honest when they push policies based on values and don't try to pretend there is a scientific justification for them.

Really. Ever heard of intelligent design?

[TimG]

Really. Ever heard of intelligent design?

I was thinking abortion or stem cells or drug prohibition.

[On Guard for Thee]

Helloooo. Who does the government get their money from? As a taxpayer I own those reports. So I want to see them whether they interfere with the oil and gas PM or not/

[Wilber]

That's not disturbing at all. In fact, it's quite logical. The government pays for the studies and the research. So any publication of said study or said research has to be approved by said government. It's works that way in government, as well as in the private sector.

The government doesn't pay for dick, it's only the middle man.

[Shady]

The government doesn't pay for dick, it's only the middle man.

Doesn't matter. Non-disclosure agreements are non-disclosure agreements.

[On Guard for Thee]

I didn't agree to live in it.

And according to a recent Harper omnibus. (which he said he\d never do along with appointing non elected senators etc etc) we now live in a "state" which contains 60 some rivers and 90 some lakes, which all seem to exist in conservative ridings. I wonder what happened to the rest of those waters? I'm just hoping we can get Ford off the news soon so we can get back to the Robocalls scandal. At least then the criminal activity being investigated would be a bit more upscale than crack smoking.

[eyeball]

I was surprised to see that Elizabeth May and the Green party, who have been loud critics, seem to be no better.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/11/15/elizabeth-mays-so-called-party-of-science-seems-to-support-a-lot-of-unscientific-public-policies/

It appears that they are targeting the conspiracy theory crowd. I think it is very sad that the Green party has gone this way.

Is there any party that trusts science or is this just the effect of the system being dominated by lawyers? Not a lot of scientist politicians...

Nonetheless, there's no shortage of political scientists.

I think a good part of the effect is caused by the amount of equal time media often gives to all viewpoints whether they're completely ridiculous or not. My guess is that stupidity is probably more profitable. How this reward and demand for stupidity loops and feeds back and forth throughout society seems a little McLuhanesque.

Whatever it is the trend looks like an evolutionary cul-de-sac to me. I can't see nature putting up with mindlessness for very long.

Edited November 19, 2013 by eyeball

[Talby]

This topic really pisses me off! It's truly an attack from the army ignorance on what should be untouchable.

The solution to this lies in legislation. It should be law that any government funded research should be posted on-line real time. Posted to a database managed by an agency external to all those that conduct or fund the research. Everything from the methodology to the raw data collected should be available as it's recorded (including errors)...to anyone, not just the Canadian public. This allows for peer review, avoids political interference and will lead to better science and ensures politicians (the personification of everything un-sciency) and their army of martinets don't meddle with it.

The cost is there whether it's all "secret" or not. I know some of you won't understand that. "It's my science, I paid for it, so I'm taking it home, so there," kinda thing...I get it, but I don't...it don't work that way. We aren't making better mascara, or having a focus group on what Dorito flavor is the best, it's sh*t like ....will our atmosphere boil away in a few years, stuff we should probably get right and share with the rest to check our work.

Science at its essence relies on complete disclosure, peer review and encourages replication/confirmation of experimental findings. This 'real time' publication of results should be an international convention. But hey, I don't expect that to be idea pushed ahead by any of the short sighted retards who tend to gravitate to politics of any party in any nation, let alone this one. If they operate on a platform supported by BS, then science isn't likely their subject of choice.

[Topaz]

This government would allow the result of these studies, if it show good things for the government but most don't and that's why they don't.

[Mighty AC]

Science at its essence relies on complete disclosure, peer review and encourages replication/confirmation of experimental findings. This 'real time' publication of results should be an international convention. But hey, I don't expect that to be idea pushed ahead by any of the short sighted retards who tend to gravitate to politics of any party in any nation, let alone this one. If they operate on a platform supported by BS, then science isn't likely their subject of choice.

Sure...but how can we possibly use the science budget to subsidize oil interests if our very own research makes it clear how dangerous that action is? How bad would it look if a nation's top scientists publicly demonstrated just how backwards their own government's policies have been? Hence, if a government is going to make unethical decisions in the interest of short term monetary gain, it is really a requirement to gag those that deal in truth and evidence. So you see...their hands are tied.

[ReeferMadness]

What makes this possible is how ignorant and unengaged the public is. What a bunch of sheep.