March for Science

Spread the love

The March for Science is scheduled to take place April 22, 2017 in DC . Hashtag #ScienceMarch

Twitter account here.

Web site here, though not much there yet, this was JUST announced seconds ago.

Please note that they are accepting donations. Click through to the donations page to give a donation!

Alternate logo here:


To find out about other marches in your area, if you can’t get to DC, for now, look at March for Science “follow” list, here. They will be putting info up at a later time, apparently.

Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:

In Search of Sungudogo by Greg Laden, now in Kindle or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.

Spread the love

17 thoughts on “March for Science

  1. So will they insist that government programs be scientifically evaluated, like Head Start and affirmative action? How about insisting that people acknowledge differences between men and women in abilities and interests, which the anti-science folks at Harvard drove out Larry Summers for saying?

  2. A better place to start would be a study to detrimental just how deep miken’s lack of knowledge is. It seems boundless.

  3. Do you agree that Larry Summers was being unscientific in his statements and should have been thrown out as President of Harvard for suggesting that women may have different interests as men and this explains the disparity in science majors?

  4. Larry Summers offered a possible explanation to be studied. He did not declare it as fact. This was unacceptable to the scientists present. The idea that women have different interests and emotions made Nancy Hopkins of MIT ‘physically ill’.

  5. No MikeN, it was presented as a done deal, contradicting the current state of research. Asserting something not established, as he did, simply because it seems reasonable, is not valid.

    I can see why your ilk believes it though – you have shown yourself to have no regard for the things data actually says.

  6. “So my best guess, to provoke you, of what’s behind all of this is that the largest phenomenon, by far, is the general clash between people’s legitimate family desires and employers’ current desire for high power and high intensity, that in the special case of science and engineering, there are issues of intrinsic aptitude, and particularly of the variability of aptitude, and that those considerations are reinforced by what are in fact lesser factors involving socialization and continuing discrimination. I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong, because I would like nothing better than for these problems to be addressable simply by everybody understanding what they are, and working very hard to address them.”

    Is it fair for a scientist to lose his job for making a statement like this?

  7. Dick has changed his socks because he’s not going to get away with denying straight up maths, and has had to admit to error, so he’s now reappeared as MikeN to continue the rightwing charge against reality and it’s damn liberal bias.

  8. Take a look at that chart. Do you find it strange that boys are outperforming girls in the Americas and Northern and Western Europe(or at least it’s about even), while the Middle East shows girls doing better? I think it is in line with what I expected based on what Larry Summers said.

    Again, why would boys be outperforming girls in these countries?

  9. Even if the girls are performing better than the boys, what Summers said would still hold, where he spoke of(or alluded to, the transcript is not available) the variation being higher for boys.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *