House Science Committee Chair Says Science Magazine Is Not 'Objective'

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by steve knight, Mar 30, 2017.

  1. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #1
    a science expert that knows nothing about science.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/lamar-smith-science-magazine-us_us_58dbae95e4b0cb23e65d06f5
     
  2. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #2
    And Smith's training in science was....?
     
  3. mooblie macrumors 6502

    mooblie

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Location:
    The Highlands, Scotland
    #3
    ...and USA continues its steady progress towards becoming the laughing stock of the world.
     
  4. Stella macrumors 604

    Stella

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Canada
    #4
    Aren't some of the committee anti-science, intelligent design supporters? Can anyone confirm? thanks!
     
  5. jerwin macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #5
    [​IMG]
     
  6. HEK macrumors 68030

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    #6
    Adam and Eve road around on dinosaurs.

    Republicans want climate change and sea level rise. Most have bought beach front property in Georgia, just south of Atlanta.
     
  7. JayMysterio macrumors 6502

    JayMysterio

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Location:
    Rock Ridge
    #7
    Now you're making them all sound like east coast Lex Luthors
    [​IMG]
     
  8. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #8
    The Bible and his heart, it goes thump, thump.
     
  9. steve knight thread starter macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #9
    you think this would be a sin but Guess not.

    Climate change

    As of 2015, Smith has received more than $600,000 from the fossil fuel industry during his career in Congress.[46] In 2014, Smith got more money from fossil fuels than he did from any other industry.[47] Smith is publicly skeptical of global warming.[48][49][50] Under his leadership, the House Science committee has held hearings that feature the views of climate change deniers,[51] subpoenaed the records and communications of scientists who published papers that Smith disapproved of,[48] and attempted to cut NASA's earth sciences budget.[52] He has been criticized for conducting "witch hunts" against climate scientists.[47] In his capacity as Chair of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, Smith issued more subpoenas in his first three years than the committee had for its entire 54-year history.[47] In a June 2016 response letter to the Union of Concerned Scientists, Mr. Smith cited the work of the House Un-American Activities Committee in the 1950s as valid legal precedent for his investigation.[53][54] Smith has a lifetime score of 7% on the National Environmental Scorecard of the League of Conservation Voters.[55][56][57]
    --- Post Merged, Mar 30, 2017 ---
    he is a christian scientist so there.
     
  10. jerwin macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #10
    Oh my. That's rather difficult to research on the web, since crackpots like "Answers in Genesis" describe certain individuals as "christian scientists".

    However, "Christian Science", as a religious movement is best known for choosing to pray rather than taking advantage of modern medicine.
     
  11. daflake macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    #11
    Not trying to support this guy (certainly don't agree with him on most of his views), but it is a magazine and is a for-profit business. This means they are going to publish articles that will make them money. Most scholarly establishments will not accept that magazine as a source for information, so Smith is not technically incorrect on his claim.
     
  12. jerwin macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #12

    You have got to be ****ing kidding me.

    You have got to be ****ing kidding me.


    Science is the journal of the AAAS, a nonprofit organization.
    It has an impact factor of 34.661.

    In the latest issue, pages 1392 through 1440 are dedicated to research articles, reports and reviews.

    For instance:

    http://science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6332/1436
    REPORT
    On the origins of oxygenic photosynthesis and aerobic respiration in Cyanobacteria

    Abstract
    The origin of oxygenic photosynthesis in Cyanobacteria led to the rise of oxygen on Earth ~2.3 billion years ago, profoundly altering the course of evolution by facilitating the development of aerobic respiration and complex multicellular life. Here we report the genomes of 41 uncultured organisms related to the photosynthetic Cyanobacteria (class Oxyphotobacteria), including members of the class Melainabacteria and a new class of Cyanobacteria (class Sericytochromatia) that is basal to the Melainabacteria and Oxyphotobacteria. All members of the Melainabacteria and Sericytochromatia lack photosynthetic machinery, indicating that phototrophy was not an ancestral feature of the Cyanobacteria and that Oxyphotobacteria acquired the genes for photosynthesis relatively late in cyanobacterial evolution. We show that all three classes independently acquired aerobic respiratory complexes, supporting the hypothesis that aerobic respiration evolved after oxygenic photosynthesis.


    http://science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6332/1408
    REPORT
    Mars’ atmospheric history derived from upper-atmosphere measurements of 38Ar/36Ar

    Abstract
    The history of Mars’ atmosphere is important for understanding the geological evolution and potential habitability of the planet. We determine the amount of gas lost to space through time using measurements of the upper-atmospheric structure made by the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution (MAVEN) spacecraft. We derive the structure of 38Ar/36Ar between the homopause and exobase altitudes. Fractionation of argon occurs as a result of loss of gas to space by pickup-ion sputtering, which preferentially removes the lighter atom. The measurements require that 66% of the atmospheric argon has been lost to space. Thus, a large fraction of Mars’ atmospheric gas has been lost to space, contributing to the transition in climate from an early, warm, wet environment to today’s cold, dry atmosphere.


    It is a journal that a lot of scientists would kill to publish in.

    Here's a non paywalled paper from 1988 that's one of the most frequently cited pieces of scientific research.

    Saiki et al. Primer-directed enzymatic amplification of DNA with a thermostable DNA polymerase
    Science 29 Jan 1988:
    Vol. 239, Issue 4839, pp. 487-491


    I dare you to read that paper and still hold on to your idiotic, harebrained delusion that Science isn't a publisher of original scientific research. And if you attend a "scholarly" institution that harbors a prejudice against articles appearing in Science,

    RUN. RUN AS FAST AND AS FAR AS YOUR LEGS WILL TAKE YOU.

    because, for a great many fields, Science is a premiere journal.
     
  13. T'hain Esh Kelch macrumors 601

    T'hain Esh Kelch

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2001
    Location:
    Denmark
    #13
    Congratulations, you get an award for the most ignorant post of 2017.

    Science is one of the most esteemed scientific journals in existance. ALL scholarly establishments that are not made up of religious crackpots will gladly accept anything from Science as a source of information, as it is some of the highest quality peer reviewed research you can get your hands on. So yes, Smith, and you, are as wrong as one can be.
     
  14. daflake macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    #14

    Maybe I am wrong, I am not a science major. However, in my academic career (spanning many years), none of my professors would allow it. If you were going to use an article from them, you needed to find the source article and not use a third party vehicle like Science. Again, I am not saying that the magazine is crap, I am just tossing a different perspective into the mix. If this was what he learned, it could be possible that is what he was meaning by his comment.

    As for the name calling, you need to chill the F out...
    --- Post Merged, Mar 31, 2017 ---
    Again, I am NOT A SCIENCE MAJOR and as I posted, I could be wrong, but it comes across to me as a magazine which are typically NOT accepted for collegiate level research papers. This is what I was talking about. If the articles are peer reviewed, then they are available by other means and that is ACCEPTABLE!

    If this truly is the case (and I am not going to go chase it down), then I stand corrected.
     
  15. jerwin macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    #15
    Read this, and get back to us.

    Instructions for Reviewers of Research Articles

     
  16. macsmurf macrumors 65816

    macsmurf

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2007
    #16
    What journal, in your mind, would be a proper source? What do you mean by third party vehicle? Do you really think the chairman's point was that there is no such thing as objective knowledge? Or is it more likely he wanted to dismiss the comment in any way he could?
     
  17. Meister Suspended

    Meister

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    #17
    You are of course correct.

    Some magazine article is not a scientifc source.

    Doesn't matter that it's called "science".
     
  18. macsmurf macrumors 65816

    macsmurf

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2007
    #18
    And what would be an example of a scientific source, as you see it? Feel free to be specific
     
  19. R.Perez, Mar 31, 2017
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2017

    R.Perez macrumors 6502

    R.Perez

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    #19

    Science is arguably one of, if not the, most prestigious scientific journals in the world.
     
  20. Arran macrumors 68040

    Arran

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2008
    Location:
    Atlanta, USA
    #20
    Most likely your professors wanted you to learn how to conduct thorough research in a proper academic library with all the available sources. They wanted you to understand that process thoroughly.

    Same reason my high school banned calculators from maths exams. It wasn't because calculators gave wrong answers. It was because the use of calculators would mask the students' inability to grasp simple arithmetic. That was the whole point of the test.
     
  21. LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #21
    We're in trouble in the new administration as well as in Congress on this whole issue.

    Excerpts:

    On the fourth floor of the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, the staff of the White House chief technology officer has been virtually deleted, down from 24 members before the election to, by Friday, only one.

    Scores of departures by scientists and Silicon Valley technology experts who advised President Trump’s predecessor have all but wiped out the larger White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

    Mr. Trump has not yet named his top advisers on technology or science, and so far, has made just one hire: Michael Kratsios, the former chief of staff for Peter Thiel, the Silicon Valley investor and one of the president’s wealthiest supporters, as the deputy chief technology officer.

    Neither Mr. Kratsios, who has a bachelor’s degree in political science from Princeton, nor anyone else still working in the science and technology office regularly participates in Mr. Trump’s daily briefings, as they did for President Barack Obama.

    ===

    Mr. Trump’s first budget proposes slashing $5.8 billion, or 18 percent, from the National Institutes of Health and $900 million, or about 20 percent, from the Energy Department’s Office of Science, which runs basic research at the national laboratories. The Environmental Protection Agency would be cut by 31 percent.

    On Tuesday, Mr. Trump issued executive orders that roll back Mr. Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which would have closed hundreds of coal-fired power plants in an effort to curb planet-warming carbon dioxide emissions.

    Those actions have been taken without advice or guidance from scientists and engineers inside the White House. The few remaining policy advisers have ceased distributing daily memos on policy issues like climate change, machine-learning regulation, or the ethics of big data collection.

    “They are flying blind when it comes to science and tech issues,” said Kumar Garg, who left the Office of Science and Technology Policy as a senior adviser after the election.
     
  22. mac_in_tosh macrumors regular

    mac_in_tosh

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2016
    Location:
    Earth
    #22
    This discussion has drifted a bit. Smith was not arguing that Science is not a proper academic source to cite. He said it wasn't objective.
     
  23. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #23
    Are you sure you're not thinking of Scientific American? Science is published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
     
  24. R.Perez macrumors 6502

    R.Perez

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2010
    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    #24

    Which is a ridiculous claim on its face. Science and Nature have some of the most rigorous peer-review processes in the world. If Science isn't objective, I wonder what is?
     
  25. HEK macrumors 68030

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    #25
    That's simple.....Trump is objectively....wrong all the time. Trumps gonna make Amerika great again, one mediocre job at a time. Science....pfoof who needs science. Just a bunch of elitists that think they know something by experimentation. Science advisors, don't need um, just like he doesn't need foreign policy guidance, or national intelligence briefings. Just watches Faux news. Besides all these facts and R&D are a waste of time and money cuz He knows more than generals so probably knows more then scientists as well.
     

Share This Page