What’s happening at March for Science events around the world

Apr 24, 2017

By Sara Reardon, Nicky Phillips, Alison Abbott, Barbara Casassus, Ewen Callaway, Alexandra Witze, Corie Lok & Emiliano Rodriguez Mega

Tens of thousands of people will gather today in Washington DC, and at least 600 other cities around the world, in what may be one of the largest-ever demonstrations in support of scientific research and evidence-based policymaking.

The March for Science was organized shortly after US President Donald Trump’s inauguration in January, largely in response to widespread alarm about his administration’s attitude toward science. Trump has repeatedly called global warming a “hoax” and promised to roll back numerous environmental protection laws. And in March, the White House released a budget proposal that included double-digit cuts to agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institutes of Health.

More than 100 scientific societies and advocacy organizations have endorsed the march, but it has also proved controversial. Critics charge that march organizers have diluted the event’s message by focusing on challenges that the scientific community faces, such as the inclusion of racial minorities, rather than advocating for science itself. Many are also concerned that the protest casts science as a partisan issue, although event organizers and supporters have pushed back, insisting the marches aren’t political.

Nature is reporting from science marches around the world today. Check back throughout the day for updates.

Continue reading by clicking the name of the source below.

8 comments on “What’s happening at March for Science events around the world

  • @OP – More than 100 scientific societies and advocacy organizations have endorsed the march, but it has also proved controversial. Critics charge that march organizers have diluted the event’s message by focusing on challenges that the scientific community faces, such as the inclusion of racial minorities, rather than advocating for science itself.

    There are fringe issues, but the core issues looked clear!

    Many are also concerned that the protest casts science as a partisan issue,

    Science, like honest judges, umpires, or referees, are only “partisan” when honest and competent rulings or information are disputed by cheats and charlatans!

    although event organizers and supporters have pushed back, insisting the marches aren’t political.

    I think this was silliness on their part!
    The attacks are political, so the defence also needs to be political as well as having integrity and being grounded in solid evidence!

    That is entirely different to the spurious position of the propagandist fake-news brigade, whose campaigns start with political ideology, biases, and assumptions rather than from evidence!

    However, scientists should expect psychological projection, and false claims pretending that scientific conclusions are ideologically based – (just like those of their detractors) – to come from the deceitful propagandists and their following parrots!

    Many of these manipulated ignorant people have no understanding of evidence, and no reasoning skills, so they think everyone fumbles around choosing whatever opinions they like to believe – just as they themselves do!

    You can’t win a political fight by abandoning the public political battlefield and surrendering it to the opposition pseudo-scientists and charlatans!
    The fight has to be political even if that fight is not of the scientists’ choosing, and even though the fight really should not be necessary, but for the dishonest anti-science disinformation propaganda campaigns.



    Report abuse

  • You will see on this other thread about the marches, that Trump’s lying is along similar lines to that of Ken Ham!

    Having disputed valid science, cut budgets, and appointed science illiterate deniers to take charge of science orientated departments, he pretends he is “supporting science”, and that his “fake alternative facts”, false news, and pseudo-scepticism are trrrooo science!

    https://www.richarddawkins.net/2017/04/march-for-science-or-march-for-reality/#li-comment-221032



    Report abuse

  • Yes, Trump is a liar. It’s a way of life for him. And he and his team have a mania for short-term profit. And Pruitt is a science-denier, and still heads the EPA. That will not change. We know he’s a liar and is determined to mislead the people. He’s a bad guy. We know all that. It’s awful when the President and his cabinet are all such bad people.

    The demonstrators “pushed back” and are saying that the march isn’t political? Yes, they are political; the denial of science, that agenda (serving the interests of Plutocratic Oligarchs) is political. Good point, Alan.

    This is bad. It’s a war, or is as worthy of a civil war as the original one was, is about life and death, good and evil.

    I think it is ISIS and big oil working together. Once we start finally investing in alternative energy the Tillersons, Trumps and Terrorists will all be taking up the spot waiting for The Angel of Darkness in the ninth circle of hell.

    http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/40319-noam-chomsky-us-is-the-most-dangerous-country-in-the-world

    Noam Chomsky: US Is the “Most Dangerous Country in the World”

    Monday, April 24, 2017

    By Dan Falcone, Truthout | Interview



    Report abuse

  • They hit an empty air base. Within a day, it was functioning again. Planes were flying off it. It was for a domestic show, you know — show what a tough guy I am; I’m not Obama. And then go back to the “normal” — I think the real things that are happening are basically the Ryan budget and the Ryan legislative programs.

    All of that’s going on right under the cover of the Trump/Spicer media extravaganzas. Those guys do one thing after another to keep the media attention focused on them. And it works. Turn on CNN and that’s what you hear, and meanwhile, these legislative achievements are being made which are chipping away at anything the government has that’s of any use to anybody. Ryan, I think, is the most dangerous guy in the government. He knows what he’s doing. And it’s very systematic. I presume he’s behind the cabinet appointments, but it’s pretty amazing that every single cabinet appointment is somebody devoted to destroying that part of government. Or making sure it doesn’t work. That’s put a lot of focus on the EPA, which is bad enough, but the most significant environmental programs are in the Department of Energy and they fall short because of that.

    So the cabinet appointments in particular look like people deliberately chosen to undermine the function of the agencies?

    Every single one: education, environment, labor — every single one is selected to undermine any aspect of government that’s of any help to people, and that doesn’t benefit the super-rich. And it’s absolutely systematic. The interesting question will be how long Trump’s constituency can fall for the con game. I mean, they’re being kicked in the face more than anybody else. But they still have faith in their man. If that collapses — which I suppose it will sooner or later — the Trump administration is going to have to turn to something pretty radical to try to maintain control.



    Report abuse

  • There is a potentially positive development here:-

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39695767

    Wikipedia’s co-founder Jimmy Wales is planning a news service that combines the work of professional journalists and volunteers.

    Jimmy Wales hopes to get enough donations to hire a team of journalists

    His goal is for Wikitribune to offer “factual and neutral” articles that help combat the problem of “fake news”.

    The service is intended to be both ad-free and free-to-read, so will rely on supporters making regular donations.

    One expert said it had the potential to become a trusted site, but suggested its influence might be limited.

    Wikitribune shares many of the features already found in Mr Wales’s online encyclopaedia, including the need for writers to detail the source of each fact and a reliance on the public to edit articles to keep them accurate.

    However, while anybody can make changes to a page, they will only go live if a staff member or trusted community volunteer approves them.

    The other big difference is that the core team of writers will be paid, although there may also be instances in which a volunteer writes the initial draft and then a staff member edits it.

    A demo version of the site, seen by the BBC, declared “the news is broken and we can fix it”.

    Mr Wales explained that he believed the advertising-based model used by most of the media had led it to “chase clicks”, which affected standards.

    “I think we’re in a world right now where people are very concerned about making sure we have high quality fact-based information, so I think there will be demand for this,” he told the BBC.

    “We’re getting people to sign up as monthly supporters and the more monthly supporters we have the more journalists we can hire.

    “In terms of minimums, if we could only hire two journalists then it would be a blog and not really worth doing.

    “But I would love to start with a lot more – 10 to 20.”



    Report abuse

  • Alan4discussion #6

    Apr 25, 2017 at 6:10 am

    His goal is for Wikitribune to offer “factual and neutral” articles that help combat the problem of “fake news”.

    There already is real and factual news; Amy Goodman, other news outlets, Rachel Maddow, O’Donnell – they are all factual. But they are called fake. This new one in the making won’t hurt but don’t delude yourselves; The more real it is, the more it will be attacked as biased. The people need to know the difference between what’s real and what is being described as fake; not the reporters/journalists, etc. See my point? Getting more and more objective (which makes no sense; you’re either factual and fair or not) is like switching seats on the goddamned Titanic. We’re up against a whirlwind of calumny.



    Report abuse

  • Dan #7
    Apr 25, 2017 at 12:59 pm

    There already is real and factual news; Amy Goodman, other news outlets, Rachel Maddow, O’Donnell – they are all factual. But they are called fake.

    In the UK, we are well aware of this from Trump’s attacks on the BBC (our state television), which operates independently under a charter which requires it to be honest, factual, and politically balanced!

    This new one in the making won’t hurt but don’t delude yourselves; The more real it is, the more it will be attacked as biased.

    If like Wiki, it goes global, it could reach places others do not! A key element of this new venture – and of the BBC, is that they are independent of advertisers, so less subject to commercial manipulation!



    Report abuse

Leave a Reply

View our comment policy.