Science is political: EPA cuts greatest impact on "communities of colour, poor & Indigenous populations" https://newrepublic.com/article/141383/trumps-epa-cuts-literally-will-make-people-sick … #marginscipic.twitter.com/wQzoBQeHnz
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
(Twitter prolly bad venue, but here I go anyway) From my read, at least, @ScienceMarchDC's 'science not political' stance +
Not true. Read all the materials I've linked to in my article including various Storify.
Thanks, trying to go back & find those. But most 'science is political' articles/tweets/etc (incl. your OP)+
I've read (so far) seem to disagree on rhetoric basis, but then make the same point (*ignoring* science is a political act).
such as https://www.forbes.com/sites/emilywillingham/2017/02/05/the-march-for-science-in-washington-is-political-whether-you-like-it-or-not/#277ebc7b5b7f …
disagrees, but then restates *exactly* the orig. point of @ScienceMarchDC (by my read).
in that regard, if you define "science" as "body of evidence and attendant conclusions," then role in +
public policy should be apolitical (free of political filter). Policy makers should set goals, then use sci+
to design policies to achieve those goals. The goal-setting is political, role of science is not, ideally.+
Increasingly, politicians distort, obfuscate, ignore, and outright lie about science in order to mask +
their political priorities. To me, this is one original intent of @ScienceMarchDC & the comment in question, and is +
an idea not sufficiently considered/resolved in the ensuing discussion (in great part due to subsequent +
.@OtherSociology ... other missteps by @ScienceMarchDC). Blah, that took too many tweets, and I'm *still* not sure I'm being 100% clear.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.