On April 22nd, people took to the streets in what was called the March for Science! It’s not really explained who would be against science; that was just a convenient straw man. In fact, there was a good representation of anti-Trump signs, so that it seemed this was equal parts scientific and political. And many folks would agree that science has become too politicized, though the marchers probably couldn’t see that it’s being done by both sides, including theirs.
Republicans are continuing to work on their repeal and replacement of ObamaCare. Well, it’s more like a “repeal and rename” strategy. Much of the failures of ObamaCare remain, but now Republicans will be blamed when the train wreck happens; a pre-existing condition that would have happened anyway, but now that the GOP will claim to have “fixed” it without actually fixing it, they’ll bring the blame on themselves.
Mentioned links:
20 Funniest Signs at the March for Science
Science vs. Science™!
The March for … What?
House Freedom Caucus endorses Republicans’ revised health care plan; centrists still wary

Show transcript
On April 22nd, people took to the streets in what was called the March for Science! It’s not really explained who would be against science; that was just a convenient straw man. In fact, there was a good representation of anti-Trump signs, so that it seemed this was equal parts scientific and political. And many folks would agree that science has become too politicized, though the marchers probably couldn’t see that it’s being done by both sides, including theirs.
For example, there were those that held signs about the “settled science” of climate change, missing the fact that science is often in a state of “unsettlement”. And I have to wonder; were there any signs pointing out the biological fact that Caitlyn Jenner is a man? How about the idea that a child in the womb has their own blood type and DNA, while the mother might insist it’s “her body”? Were there any signs thanking President George W. Bush for being right on the embryonic stem cell debate? Science found a way to avoid the whole ethical issue, but I’d be incredibly surprised if anyone credited science for affirming his moral stance. And what kind of debate would this be if I didn’t mention Nazis; you know, those folks who experimented on Jews in the name of science?
This is just like the March for Women, where pro-life opinions were not allowed. In both of these events, the Left has demonstrated clearly how political they are willing to go in pursuit of an agenda. Unlike the science they claim to revere, only the facts and ideas that they find useful can be considered. It’s liberalism in a lab coat, and they’re not seeing that clearly. [She blinded me with science.]
And yes, the Right does it, too, but the idea that the Left is pro-science and the Right is anti-science – an idea promoted on many a protest sign – is just wrong on its face. Those who participated in the March for Science didn’t seem to understand that they were one more data point against the very idea they were propagating. It’s too bad there isn’t a scientific formula for irony.

Speaking of science, and the whole climate change thing, Joe Bastardi, writing at the Patriot Post, asks those marchers to take a critical look at the actual science of it. They won’t, of course.
Joe points out that, at very large time scales, the correlation of CO2 and temperature is awful; they have no apparent linkage. He then suggests that perhaps these allegedly pro-science peopl...