Politics CHARLIE KIRK SHOT IN UTAH

Sorry to double reply to you, Chris. BUT FUCKING PREACH ABOUT THE STUDENTS AND TEACHERS. That indoctrinating bullshit stuff is fucking stupid. The fuck you calling Oklahoma with required Bible stuff? Yeah, THATS indoctrinating. Because they forced that. Youre not forcing math, science, English, writing... thats the core subjects.


Shit drives me nuts.

 

See that word CAN in there? It is being spun i said science cant be trusted. Bullshit. I never said teachers cant be trusted and yet some teacher have agendas.

Are you actually gonna claim all scientists are 100% on the up and up and not one might have a personal agenda based on ideologies?

You and others are omitting certain words to make my statement seem different than it is.
That is a literacy issue or an agenda of its own accord. I dont know…

 

when you twist ones words around and/or omit certain words from a statement, it changes the context and meaning. That is not open and honest dialogue…

 

I didn't omit shit. I directly quoted your post. I can do it again for you...

 

Exactly how were scientists "silenced"? No one was arrested or sent to concentration camps. The small minority who rejected the emerging scientific consensus about Covid were feted on Fox and other right wing media as martyrs while raking in cash on quackery like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.

 

Wth? Saying that some can have agendas is saying school children are being indoctrinated?

how much further aRe you going to twist my words up????

 

yea you did. In the first post i said some scientists CAN have agendas. I didnt know i then Had to specify that again in every following statement. My error for thinking you would follow along. My fault.

 

All scientists don't have to be on the up and up. That's the whole point about the scientific method, competition and peer-reviewed studies.

It's not a perfect system but it's better than anything else we have.

If you accept the scientific consensus and take action with that in mind you are generally going to be going in a logical direction that is far more likely to work out well and less likely to work out poorly.

From my perspective if you make policies based on these scientific consensuses which help the poor and middle class (well protecting individual freedom) then everybody will be better off.

 

es, legitimate scientists, being human, can and do have personal agendas and biases that can influence their work
. A personal agenda isn't always negative or malicious; however, a robust scientific process is designed with safeguards to mitigate its effects and ensure the reliability of research.
What are a scientist's personal agendas and motivations?
Scientists are motivated by a complex mix of professional and personal factors, which can sometimes create biases or conflicts of interest. These motivations include:

• Career advancement: Scientists may focus on topics that are likely to attract funding, gain recognition, and lead to prestigious publications in high-impact journals, which are often necessary for career progression.
• Desire for fame and prestige: Similar to other professionals, a scientist's desire for recognition and legacy can influence their choice of research subjects and the way they present their findings.
• Passion and curiosity: Many scientists are driven by a genuine passion for their field and a desire to solve puzzles and make discoveries. This intrinsic motivation is central to scientific progress.
• Political or ideological beliefs: A researcher's personal views on political, social, or religious issues can consciously or unconsciously influence their research. This can affect the questions they ask, the data they emphasize, and how they interpret results.
• Financial gain: A scientist's financial interests, such as stock ownership in a company that sponsors their research, can create a conflict of interest.
• Desire to help society: Many scientists are motivated by a sense of duty to improve human health or protect the environment, driving them to pursue research with practical applications.

How does science account for personal agendas?
Scientific integrity relies on a system of checks and balances designed to combat personal bias and agendas. These include:

• Peer review: Before publication, research papers are scrutinized by other experts in the field. The peer-review process is designed to catch flaws in methodology, interpretation, and potential bias.
• Transparency and disclosure: Scientists are expected to be transparent about any potential conflicts of interest, including funding sources and financial relationships. This allows the scientific community and the public to evaluate whether an outside interest may have influenced the research.
• Replication of results: For findings to be widely accepted, other scientists must be able to independently replicate the results. If a finding is based on an individual's bias, it is unlikely to hold up to replication.
• Diverse perspectives: A diverse scientific community with varying backgrounds, beliefs, and viewpoints helps identify and challenge potential biases. It ensures that research questions and interpretations are considered from multiple angles.
• Reflexivity: Scientists are trained to recognize their own biases and actively reflect on how these may be affecting their work. This self-awareness is a key part of maintaining scientific rigor.

While personal agendas and biases are an unavoidable part of human nature, the scientific method and institutional oversight provide a robust framework for minimizing their impact. This process helps ensure that the overall body of scientific knowledge is reliable and objective, even if individual scientists are not always perfectly neutral.

 

No, you said some scientific studies CAN be manipulated, and let's not act like teachers and scientists don't have agendas. My error for thinking you can follow your own posts.

 

I'm really glad they caught this kid. As a 22 year old with no voting record, it's something concerning to us all that that kid would take up arms to voice his political dissatisfaction rather than trust the system to hold corrupt leaders accountable. This is where you need criminal psychologists to study how we got to this point. These recent shooters are young angry males...used to be mostly old angry males.

 

its not about what Chris. Is how i say SOME scientists CAN and its being turned into me saying science has agendas.
That is not the same. You, as an educator, should know this.

 

but is that what you said I said? Nope.