Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Brave new frontier of science: $710,000 study

Geogeer
Posts: 4,263
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2016 3:09:34 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
Topic:
Glaciers, gender, and science: A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research.

From abstract:
Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.

Your tax money hard at work...
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2016 3:13:07 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
"What's wrong with social science?"
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
MattTheDreamer
Posts: 1,399
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2016 7:47:22 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/14/2016 3:09:34 AM, Geogeer wrote:
Topic:
Glaciers, gender, and science: A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research.

From abstract:
Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.

Your tax money hard at work...
I knew that glaciers were being held down by the patriarchy!
roun12
Posts: 177
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2016 5:25:45 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
Is this even real life anymore? Why would someone fund this?!?!?
"No, I disagree. 'R' is among the most menacing of sounds. That's why they call it MURDER, not Muckduck." - Dwight

"Tell people there's an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure." - George Carlin
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2016 5:34:37 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/14/2016 3:09:34 AM, Geogeer wrote:
Topic:
Glaciers, gender, and science: A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research.

From abstract:
Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.

Your tax money hard at work...

Since you didn't provide a citation I looked up the abstract and obviously there's more to it than your OP suggests.

1) You post a figure with no source.
2) You post a part of an abstract of a paper... biased much? You could basically quote any line of anything out of context.
3) I'd be surprised if anyone who's posted in this thread so far (including me) has read the paper.

I'm not interested in reading the paper or seeing what it's about, but the lack of critical thinking here is astounding.

If anyone is interested in reading the paper (again, I'm not), here it is:

http://phg.sagepub.com...
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
TheFlex
Posts: 1,745
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2016 5:44:37 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
"Feminist glaciology asks how knowledge related to glaciers is produced, circulated, and gains credibility and authority across time and space. It simultaneously brings to the forefront glacier knowledge that has been marginalized or deemed "outside" of traditional glaciology. It asks how glaciers came to be meaningful and significant (through what ontological and epistemological process), as well as trying to destabilize underlying assumptions about ice and environment through the dismantling of a host of boundaries and binaries. The feminist lens is crucial given the historical marginalization of women, the importance of gender in glacier-related knowledges, and the ways in which systems of colonialism, imperialism, and patriarchy co-constituted gendered science."

"There was what Hevly calls a "culture of field science" in the 19th century that favored "authentic, rigorous, manly experience", and scientists " let alone women " who did not explicitly demonstrate that their glaciological conclusions stemmed from heroic, manly adventures struggled to make their scientific claims credible. Glaciology was for muscular gentlemen scientists. Women could read about glaciers in the Alps, but they were not fit for glaciological research, field science, or even alpine tourism. And men like Forbes who lacked the manly heroism of risk-taking mountaineers lost scientific credibility that hinged on masculinism. "

Okay, WTF did I just read? I'm quoting two of the more interesting paragraphs I read through. I'm tempted to think this is an elaborate troll attempt on feminism. I couldn't find a source for the figure attached, like Lamerde pointed out. If the amount is indeed that much -- holy sh!t, what a waste of money.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,074
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2016 6:37:20 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/14/2016 5:34:37 PM, lamerde wrote:
At 3/14/2016 3:09:34 AM, Geogeer wrote:
Topic:
Glaciers, gender, and science: A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research.

From abstract:
Merging feminist postcolonial science studies and feminist political ecology, the feminist glaciology framework generates robust analysis of gender, power, and epistemologies in dynamic social-ecological systems, thereby leading to more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.

Your tax money hard at work...

Since you didn't provide a citation I looked up the abstract and obviously there's more to it than your OP suggests.

1) You post a figure with no source.
2) You post a part of an abstract of a paper... biased much? You could basically quote any line of anything out of context.
3) I'd be surprised if anyone who's posted in this thread so far (including me) has read the paper.

I'm not interested in reading the paper or seeing what it's about, but the lack of critical thinking here is astounding.

If anyone is interested in reading the paper (again, I'm not), here it is:

http://phg.sagepub.com...

Why would the validity of glacier science be affected by the gender of the people making the discoveries? In what possible ways could this distort the research?
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2016 6:55:51 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/14/2016 6:37:20 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:

Why would the validity of glacier science be affected by the gender of the people making the discoveries? In what possible ways could this distort the research?

I'm not interested in defending the research. I'm not familiar with it and not interested in getting familiar with it.

My issue is with the sheep mentality... that someone could post something with clearly biased information and nobody sought out addition information and just formed an opinion based on the OP. People didn't just form an opinion on the research based on a snippet of an abstract, but also the entire social sciences. That's a ridiculous way to approach life.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
lamerde
Posts: 1,416
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2016 6:57:40 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/14/2016 6:55:51 PM, lamerde wrote:

nobody sought out additional information

I don't care whether people think this is stupid or not. At least have an informed opinion about it.
Why I ignore YYW:
http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...
Calling someone a bitch multiple times while claiming you're taking the high road is an art form, I suppose: http://www.debate.org...
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/15/2016 6:35:40 PM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/14/2016 3:13:07 AM, someloser wrote:
"What's wrong with social science?"

One study isn't representative of all of social science... whoever approved that funding in the NSF has some explaining to do though!
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...