Culture Intelligent Design News Science

March for Science defends ISIS?

Spread the love
Alex Berezow

As ‘Marginalized People’ From Alex Berezow at American Council for Science and Health:

Today, the official March for Science Twitter account criticized the Trump Administration for bombing ISIS, claiming that the gigantic bomb we dropped on the terrorists is an “example of how science is weaponized against marginalized people.”

After being mocked on Twitter, they deleted it. Unfortunately for them, Todd Myers of the Washington Policy Center screen capped it. And just like a latent herpes infection, screen caps live forever.

ISIS terrorists brutally murder anyone, including other Muslims, who do not share their perverted worldview. They behead “infidels” and oppress women. Actually, “oppression” isn’t even close to the right word for it. According to The Independent, ISIS extremists rape little girls and burn women alive. They whip and stone disobedient women. The women who submit to this horrifying reality aren’t even allowed to leave the house without a male relative. Life under the Islamic State is literally a living hell for women. More.

The bomb may be a terrible policy idea; debate rages about Hiroshima (1945) today. But is defending ISIS, widely associated with executing gays and women who have sex outside marriage, a good way to convince people to think about the problems of science?

The March is  shaping up to be quite an event: Acting out against the real world settling in.

See also: Nature advises scientists concerned about March for Science’s “special interests”: Shout louder. Unfortunately, campus fascists have cornered the market on shouting louder.

and

Marchin’, marchin’ for Science (Hint: the problems are back at your desk, not out in the streets)

Follow UD News at Twitter!

7 Replies to “March for Science defends ISIS?

  1. 1
    tjguy says:

    I’m just flabbergasted at this kind of thinking!

    TOTAL SHOCK!!

    I simply cannot fathom that any sane person could logically arrive at such a conclusion!

    It just shows how ignorant these leftists are about ISIS!

    Poor marginalized ISIS! Never mind the fact they go around burning people alive, cutting off the heads of Christians and other detractors, torturing people, destroying families, stealing women and making them sex slaves, displacing people from their homes through war, imposing their extreme views on people living in the lands they have conquered, encouraging terror all over the world.

    Poor marginalized ISIS!

    Really – this is such an outrageous statement!

    Aren’t the marginalized ones here the people they rape, torture, kill, drive out, and enslave?

    His moral standards are so twisted. We CANNOT afford to have people like this in places of influence teaching our children!!

  2. 2
    mahuna says:

    “The bomb may be a terrible policy idea; debate rages about Hiroshima (1945) today.”

    You do understand that the bomb dropped in Afghanistan was simply a VERY large conventional bomb with a conventional filler (I forget whether it’s TNT or RDX/PETN).

    A single B-52 or B-1 can drop a greater weight of explosives as individual 750-lb (this is a CLASS, not the actual weight of the fuzed ordnance) bombs. MOAB is more for publicity purposes. At night, it lights up the sky like a sunrise.

    A number of MOABs (of a different model) were dropped in Iraq, both during Gulf I (Classic) and Gulf II (the Sequel).

    For softer targets (the Afghan attack was on a bunker complex), you can get better effect using FAE (Fuel-Air Explosive), which is basically a cloud of propane (or other volatile fuel) allowed to mix with the air before it’s lit off. The entire cloud detonates (an “explosion” is simply a VERY rapid combustion) at virtually the same time, producing over-pressures similar to a nuclear explosion. And humans (or bluebirds or cute little bunny rabbits) under the cloud are essentially crushed to death.

    When you switch to nukes, you can literally vaporize the target, since the explosion is hotter than the surface of the Sun.

    Not that I’ve spent WAY too many years thinking about these things…

  3. 3
    Denyse OLeary says:

    tjguy at 1: There is no real surprise here. Progressives routinely make common cause with terrorists. It’s only just now spreading to the sciences. Marchin’, marchin.

  4. 4
    kairosfocus says:

    Really? MOAB is effectively an update to the RAF 6-ton Tallboy and 10-ton Grand Slam bombs from WW2.

  5. 5
    News says:

    Some of us see the big problem here as the complete meltdown of science into global politics. Whether the policy is good or bad statecraft, it isn’t science.

    Scientists can certainly help by shedding light on choices and their consequences but not by picking sides as if they were merely a giant coalition of grievance groups.

    Unfortunately, the marchin,’ marchin’ probably are just that, a giant coalition of grievance groups. Something the world gets more tired of with each passing day.

    We shall see.

  6. 6
    kairosfocus says:

    The more science gets embroiled in ideological politics and the more it sacrifices its commitment to proper inductive reasoning towards accurate representation of reality i/l/o empirical evidence [as in no simulation exercise on a computer is an observation of actual reality], the more it discredits itself and contributes to the ruin of our civilisation.

  7. 7
    jstanley01 says:

    At one minute past midnight on January 1, 1945, General George S. Patton ordered a thirty minute artillery barrage, using every gun along the Third Army front line, as a New Year’s greeting to the German Army.

    Trump’s use of the MOAB is similar, in my estimation. The message to ISIS being, “There’s a new sheriff in town.”

Leave a Reply