If you don't already know what "Danielscience" is, please read any one of several threads, here in the SMMT section of ISF, in which ISF member Daniel has posted (I'll provide links if anyone asks).
I am wondering what would happen, here in the US, if the sole criterion for making (Federal) government science policy was strict alignment with Danielscience (various State and non-governmental policies too, but I'd like to focus on the Federal government).
As I understand it, such a policy would call for a complete demolition of many agencies, such as NASA, and NOAA. NSF funding for research on a wide range of fields would be cut (to zero), e.g. astronomy, climate science, archaeology, geology, ecology, to name but a few. Ditto any research in agriculture, medicine, forestry, animal husbandry (and much more) which even referred to "evolution".
Why? Because the only research acceptable in Danielscience is that based on experiments conducted 'in a lab'. Here on Earth. In Danielscience, evolution does not exist, much less is acceptable. (and a great many 'in the lab' experiments would also be ruled "not Danielscience"; see Daniel on "Independent" and "Dependent" Variables).
All government funded/sponsored work on managing and maintaining GPS would have to cease (GR, the basis of such systems, is not Danielscience, because "time cannot bend").
There's much more, of course.
What do you think?
I am wondering what would happen, here in the US, if the sole criterion for making (Federal) government science policy was strict alignment with Danielscience (various State and non-governmental policies too, but I'd like to focus on the Federal government).
As I understand it, such a policy would call for a complete demolition of many agencies, such as NASA, and NOAA. NSF funding for research on a wide range of fields would be cut (to zero), e.g. astronomy, climate science, archaeology, geology, ecology, to name but a few. Ditto any research in agriculture, medicine, forestry, animal husbandry (and much more) which even referred to "evolution".
Why? Because the only research acceptable in Danielscience is that based on experiments conducted 'in a lab'. Here on Earth. In Danielscience, evolution does not exist, much less is acceptable. (and a great many 'in the lab' experiments would also be ruled "not Danielscience"; see Daniel on "Independent" and "Dependent" Variables).
All government funded/sponsored work on managing and maintaining GPS would have to cease (GR, the basis of such systems, is not Danielscience, because "time cannot bend").
There's much more, of course.
What do you think?
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1Uy21Sp
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire