Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Meanwhile we've put a bunch of science deniers in power that will surely contribute to us falling behind. Been a long time coming, but I wonder what the world will look like when China is leading the way in tech. From the military on down to having the best consumer tech rather than their current rep of cheap knock offs.
Scientific? Science is now validated by quantity of article published rather than content?
Science deniers translates to challenging scientific conclusions. Science cannot exist with out challenge. No challenge, no science.
To charge 'science denier' is a political strategy that has no relationship to science.
When challenges to findings are condemned, we are in a fascist state where the political narrative cannot be allowed to be questioned. A crime against the state.
Scientific? Science is now validated by quantity of article published rather than content?
Science deniers translates to challenging scientific conclusions. Science cannot exist with out challenge. No challenge, no science.
To charge 'science denier' is a political strategy that has no relationship to science.
When challenges to findings are condemned, we are in a fascist state where the political narrative cannot be allowed to be questioned. A crime against the state.
The key is that challenges must also be backed up by data and repeatable experiments. Not just because some nutjob on the radio doesn't think it makes sense/jives with his world view.
Did they just copy OUR articles? That would be more in line with their usual MO. Just steal and reverse engineer our stuff.
BTW this article is pretty biased (and deliberately unscientific in order to accomplish that bias). Was it written by the PRC press directorate, perhaps?
Example:
Quote:
"...while the number of people graduating with a science bachelor’s degree has risen from 359,000 to 1.65 million between 2000 and 2014, compared to 483,000 to 742,000 in the US."
Well, that would possibly be useful information except for the fact that China has a population that is more than 4x that of the US.
So an unbiased way of presenting this data would be to either include that fact, OR to normalize the data so that it is presented as "bachelor's degrees awarded annually per capita".
So, unbiased, it would look something like, "In China, 1.2 of a thousand people earn a science bachelors each year, compared to 2.2 of a thousand in the US."
Last edited by phantompilot; 01-22-2018 at 06:10 PM..
Did they just copy OUR articles? That would be more in line with their usual MO. Just steal and reverse engineer our stuff.
BTW this article is pretty biased (and deliberately unscientific in order to accomplish that bias). Was it written by the PRC press directorate, perhaps?
Example:
Well, that would possibly be useful information except for the fact that China has a population that is more than 4x that of the US.
So an unbiased way of presenting this data would be to either include that fact, OR to normalize the data so that it is presented as "bachelor's degrees awarded annually per capita". So, unbiased, it would look something like, "In China, 1.2 of a thousand people earn a science bachelors each year, compared to 2.2 of a thousand in the US."
Sure, but scientific advancement of a country is not on a per capita basis.
Article even speaks to our quality potentially being higher.
"But it is important to note that this does not mean that the US has lost its importance or influence in scientific research. While China might now be producing more research overall, the US still wracks up more citations, behind only Sweden and Switzerland, and above the EU, which is followed by China. This could reflect that the work being carried out in the US involves more fundamental questions."
The age of enlightenment's flame over the United States is dwindling for sure. Canada, China, and England will be the 3 big powerhouses soon.
LOL. What did China contribute to The Enlightenment? Nothing. It was a Western, mainly European movement.
And Canada? What has Canada ever invented? Cmon man...you're really stretching here. Wake me up when Canada contributes a fundamental invention or fosters a paradigm shift. I had to google it to find out they invented insulin. Although that's still 100% more than any sub-Saharan African nation has ever contributed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haakon
So they produce more papers, big deal. They've got 4x the population the US does too, it's easy to churn out mountains of crap.
Meanwhile we've put a bunch of science deniers in power that will surely contribute to us falling behind. Been a long time coming, but I wonder what the world will look like when China is leading the way in tech. From the military on down to having the best consumer tech rather than their current rep of cheap knock offs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
