Kryten

No. I pushed back on your post and you were seemingly incredulous that I dare question your authority. I’m not toxic, you are just acting out instead of reflecting on what you wrote. I mean c’mon, you are trying to police everyone in this thread. I suggest you go back and look, or don’t, idc. Anyways, I love Gurn’s energy and Jimmy’s pragmatism but I doubt we will get anything but the usual virtue signalling from the usual suspects. Voting is the only way to put your opinion into action but it really doesn’t seem to carry much weight does it? I don’t have the solution, I don’t think anyone save the PM has it? At least in terms of funding (found some cash for Covid relief but not Waywayseecappo?). I like the thought behind investing in a memorial but it again smacks of virtue signalling to me. A memorial for Canada to look upon and feel better about itself instead of actually helping the people(s) that were victimized. IMO, we should put all available monies, donations, volunteers into ensuring every First Nations community has infrastructure and access to clean, running water etc etc etc. I don’t know how, but the politicians need to keep the thought of the publicity of unveiling a touching memorial out of their heads and focus on actually keeping future First Nations peoples from continuing to die too young. A virtue signal from me, but seriously, why has this not happened yet? Why are towns like Waywayseecappo still in so much trouble? This gov’t (and others) seem to never fail at explaining how sorry they are while doing nothing to actually help. Maybe sports teams and businesses that are eager to plaster themselves with orange hearts for all to see would be willing to put their money where their mouths are (pipe dream, but whatever). I wonder if the church would be able to spare some coin....may need to revisit their tax status....

Get off the cross, we need the wood.

I imagine this was what residential schools expected of their prisoners/pupils.

$&@% all racists. Those who abused First Nations peoples then and now, and the CRT pimps in this thread. Seriously, go $&@# yourselves.

Yep. Banger. Love it. Thank you.

This list will not be as original as others. Good music is good music, even if it is now considered mainstream. 1. Pantera - Vulgar Display of Power My introduction to metal, will be forever grateful. 2. Metallica - Master of Puppets Probably the best metal album ever. Never gets old. 3. Ministry - The Mind Is A Terrible Thing To Taste This band is criminally underrated. Their live shows were so $&@#ing entertaining. 4. Soulfly - Primitive Incredible album reminds me of many great nights with friends and teammates. Loved that this band experimented with different genres and who doesn’t enjoy tribal drums? (And yes, also a Sepultura fan). The posted song is one of my favourites. 5. Disturbed - Ten Thousand Fists In The Air Another great album that never gets old, love that I can play it through without skipping a single track. This was a difficult list to make as there are many albums that influenced me that I didn’t mention as they either aren’t really considered metal or they just did not have enough bangers IMO to make the list. Some of my other loves: Surfer Rosa, Independent Worm Saloon, Nevermind, No Control, RATM, Demanufacture, Bloody Pit of Horror, Toxicity, All Hope Is Gone, Chamber Music, Doolittle, Pioughed. Also any song performed by Floor Jansen.

Those of us who know you, understand you are a quality person. Stay strong bby, you have my support!

Butthole Surfers feat “young” Ozzy? Sign me up

Yes this is what I mull over when conflating one side with the other in respect to scientific facts and the push back involved. I wonder how many scientists experience the “Who Killed the Electric Car” scenario compared to others? A scary thought. The act of scaring young scientists into disciplines that are career safe and unchallenging might prevent innovations like the electric car from ever being created in the first place. I wonder if the first nuclear vehicle or other volatile propulsion system will face the scrutiny of the uninformed activist as opposed to the scientific peer? What could offend the activist? Environmental impact? Health impact? Social impact? Perhaps I am simply guilty of romanticizing the act of innovation. I hope so. I see religion comes up often and I find it funny to be the one to offer up a minor defence for it since I am an atheist. IMO, religion and science can co-exist only if science takes precedence in real world applications. I have no problem if someone uses their religion to make themselves a better person. However, if it is used to coerce or police others then it can GTFO. I look at social media as a game changer, and not just for refuting science facts. A left-winger wielding a hashtag can force a CEO to fire anyone in his/her company who offends the “customer” simply because that CEO has chosen to publicly join the woke brigade of inclusion and is now obligated to do their bidding without due process or a proper analysis. Previously, a team of lawyers and publicists would shield a company from the wrath of public opinion but nowadays CEO’s are in the trenches trading blows with everyone and their dog and they are pressured to act immediately or risk losing revenue. A right-winger can barely find a platform to post their content haha. Yes, this consequence is largely their own damn fault (RIP Clam and Harvey), but there are liberals on platforms who are being called right-wingers and being banned for just bringing up controversial subjects that are not remotely conservative talking points. That is another slippery slope that worries me and puts me in the position of having to defend the right-wing’s right to a platform for them to post whatever crap they want, within reason of course. I would be bummed if I lost the ability to follow George Will as much as I would if I could no longer follow Noam Chomsky. Both are important voices. I am aware that this online activism is a fairly recent development but I fear this is only the beginning. I want healthy debate across all platforms and I want a healthy opposition to better keep ourselves grounded in reality. I’m going to enjoy it while it lasts at the very least.

Interesting, have not heard this perspective before. I am assuming this is referring to greed and the relationship with capitalism and the evolution of such a union?

Very true and I should add that I know Rupe’s heart is in the right place and he is a smart guy. Certainly knew that I was opening a can of worms and I was willing to take some hits until we reach the place necessary to have what is I believe to be a very interesting discussion. I can’t wait to get to @The Lock ‘s post which is a good one.

I see, no harm done.

That is what I meant and thank you.

Never said that which is why I wanted you to quote my post. My assertion is that both left and right are guilty, not just the right. Equality of blame was never in mind. My controversial opinion, and yes it is open to change, is that the left will do more damage to science than the right if we continue down this path of unvetted activism.

They don’t have to represent the main stream, social media has allowed them to bypass the vetting process and go right to the source. That is the point and I was hoping for your thoughts on online activism and your opinion on cancel culture and it’s effect on universities and their scientists. If you don’t feel like offering an opinion, that’s ok. I’m disappointed if that’s the case but c’est la vie. I would ask you to prove it but I really do not care about the numbers as it does not have anything to do with my position which you have unequivocally failed to address. The numbers are not important, what is important is the fact that the left has a mob of online activists influencing everything from policy to science in a very negative manner. I respect your position Rupe and was hoping you would offer your own opinion instead of just a criticism of mine.

It was not a partisan hack piece which is why it did not use politically explicit language. Tuller is not “one pissed off guy”, he crowdfunded and spearheaded a movement. The majority of his supporters are left-wing and they used their influence to curtail the very research that could potentially help them because they felt offended that their affliction may not be strictly anatomical. If a more explicit piece is required, fine. Here is a piece by a more partisan author on a very controversial issue (which is why I didn’t lead with it but alas, it is what is): https://quillette.com/2018/12/09/a-surfeit-of-empathy-and-an-absence-of-compassion/ Olivia Goldhill (now covers Covid response for Stat) wrote these pieces before the Left discovered the power of social media activism: https://qz.com/740569/one-of-the-fastest-growing-fields-in-science-still-makes-a-lot-of-people-very-uncomfortable/ https://www.google.ca/amp/s/qz.com/1177154/political-scientific-biases-the-left-is-guilty-of-unscientific-dogma-too/amp/ Right-wingers are not the only ones opposing their own interests. You are misrepresenting my position and please don’t be afraid to quote me or the article (especially the post where I acknowledge my exaggeration), your paraphrase was not at all accurate and not appreciated. IMO, the left was just as culpable as the right in the anti-vaxxer movement, especially here in BC. I am a vaccine advocate and the push back is from ALL sides (just look at what we are experiencing now). Anyways, here is an article which touched on the partisanship of the anti-vaxxer movement: https://www.realclearscience.com/journal_club/2014/10/20/are_liberals_or_conservatives_more_anti-vaccine_108905.html Left and right are both wrapped up in religious BS. Evangelicalism, Satanism, Baptist, New Age, Sunni, Jainism, Shia, Wiccan; all have members of varying political affiliation. Climate is absolutely a failure on the right side of the spectrum. They value the spectre of trickle down economics more than our future (and their children’s future ffs). The failure to fight climate change is 100% the fault of the right. No argument there. I know I am being tough on liberals but that is because I am one and it pains me to see bad faith arguments, whataboutism, cancellation etc of diverse opinions simply because it is not in line with today’s group think. Yes, most liberal activists have good intentions but those intentions could very well cause harm. They should embrace dialogue and research, not shut it down. Are there literally millions of left-wing activists who employ silencing tactics? I don’t know. All I know is that such tactics are wrong, I do not care how many use them.

It was and I apologize for my passive aggression, it’s just my way of being an ass (I deserve to get smacked every so often so I remember to mind my manners). I admit I initially thought you were being bad faith, but I do remember you being reasonable in the past.

Lol, did you actually read those research notes? Those are reviews and epidemiological studies, not actionable research. Here, I copied a portion for you: Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) is a debilitating disease with unknown causes. From the perspectives on the etiology and pathophysiology, ME/CFS has been labeled differently, which influenced changes in case definitions and terminologies. This review sought to feature aspects of the history, developments, and differential symptoms in the case definitions. A search was conducted through PubMed published to February 2020 using the following search keywords: case definition AND chronic fatigue syndrome [MeSH Terms]. Bolded for viewing pleasure. Anyways, I am sure this is being researched by someone somewhere. That isn’t the point, the point is that research will now be stigmatized and create an arena for ideologues and not scientists to do battle. Scientists should be free to research however they choose and the feelings of the hypersensitive should not alter the results of such studies or result in the culture of fear if that research doesn’t follow the “plan”.

Yes, a branch not a field Has CSF been successfully researched? No? Where is the lineup of scientists to solve this problem? There isn’t one. Why not? All answered by the article. JFC, stay on target and don’t lose the thread by pointing out one exaggeration.

Who said anything about an entire field being stopped? If that is your only take away, I have a feeling you are leaning bad faith on this issue.

Tuller and his loudest followers are left-wing ideologues. He is as left-wing as Ted Cruz is right-wing. We are talking about people who prefer crystals and naturopathy to real medical research. The article goes over the damage caused. I don’t know why you posted that Jon Oliver clip (watched every episode btw). It has no relevance to scientists being bullied by activists. I see you missed the part of the article which stated David Tuller was a professor at Berkeley

Yes, and those in the middle end up taking the shots.

IMO, @Smashian Kassian is correct in saying both left-wingers and right-wingers are guilty of science denial/sabotage. I personally believe that the Left will end up doing more harm to science than the right, especially during today’s political climate. You asked for an actual example so I will give you one written by Kate Kelland from Reuters: https://news.trust.org/item/20190418094429-rl1l2 Science is under attack by BOTH extremes of the political spectrum, however; only the Left has been able to cancel entire branches of science because particularly loud individuals were offended by the results. Yes the Right cries about scientific results but the research is published no matter how much they whine. The Left keeps scientists in a state of fear that keeps them from doing the research at all. More people need to be aware and combat this anti-progressive, scientific “cherry-picking”.

Strawman, I never said that. My opinion is that during today’s political climate and power of social media, the left is more prevalent and effective using their online activism to silence conversations or individuals they believe dispute their feelings than those on the right. The right certainly has their misguided angst, but they have more trouble than the left winning companies to their cause due to their politics being socially exclusive and not inclusive. Easy decision for companies to make, bad for those of us who want to engage in conversation and include all perspectives. There are obviously a few differences between your Super Bowl example and those we experience today, most notably IMO is that there are victims of cancel culture who aren’t famous working celebrities that don’t have the resources to revitalize their careers (many journalists and scientists included). The key platform for such non-celebrity is social media and that platform is hostile territory once blood is in the water. This causes people with unique perspectives to keep silent to avoid the trouble. P***** me off.

I agree. The act of universities and enormous corporations crushing scientists and journalists at the whim of non-vetted social media activists is going to cause huge problems for the West. Snake swallowing it’s own tail indeed. Olivia Wilde had Hitchens as her babysitter, you just might be on to something. Totally agree btw. What really grinds my gears is that so many are quick to jump on a celebrity or journalist for something they were perceived to say by individuals too ignorant to understand what was actually said or intended. It then becomes a virtue-signalling competition while the target is left trying to establish context for people who smell blood in the water and are singularly focused on hurting them and anyone who even attempts at dissecting the issue. All these “woke” activists want is to pat themselves on the back and label anyone who pushes back as right-wingers. Is this guy right-wing? I do think B.O. was wrong about one thing: they ARE activists. Companies, universities and politicians are listening to them and responding because they view everything through a financial filter as opposed to a moral one.