The March For Science Doesn’t Understand Science

Whenever I’m at a loss for what to write about, I take to my Twitter account. It’s been a pretty crazy week, preparing to travel (with a toddler!) down to the good old US of A for some Halsey News happenings, and writing has unfortunately taken a bit of a backseat. Though a lot of my readers flatter me as some sort of prolific commentator, I aim for three pieces a week – and sometimes even that doesn’t happen. Which, of course, leads to me sitting down for a baby-nap-time-long writing session armed with no idea what to write and not a lot of time to write it.

This fine sunny Saturday morning was no exception. Fortunately, as always, Twitter discussions (and sometimes discussions on my Periscope)  have a way of sparking my sleep-deprived mom brain. It amazes me just how many of my small ideas on Twitter undergo a metamorphosis into full-fledged articles.

Between arguing with white nationalists and stressing over the French election, I got into a bit of a friendly spat with a transgender person.

This individual typified the incoherent beliefs about gender dysphoria and transgenderism that are so commonly held by the left. At some point, I’d like to write more specifically about these issues (I have written once on this topic in the past) because I find them interesting, but today, I want to talk a little bit about yesterdays “March for Science”.

The hashtag #MarchForScience was trending on Twitter yesterday, as mostly left-wing activists took to the streets to protest Donald Trump’s anti-science White House… or something.  Truthfully, like most marches and protests by those on the left, I didn’t pay a whole lot of attention to their stated goals. Whenever I do, I find that almost everyone actually  in attendance is disingenuous at best and downright disinterested in actually protesting anything at worst.

I’m getting a little bored of these protests, which have become nothing but excuses to virtue signal and to leave a bunch of literal garbage behind for the rest of us to pick up.

However, for the sake of this article and journalistic integrity and all that, I made my way to the March for Science website and decided to do a little reading. It took about two sentences for me to realize why this protest was a bunch of bull. 

We unite as a diverse, nonpartisan group to call for science that upholds the common good and for political leaders and policy makers to enact evidence based policies in the public interest.

I think most of you can discern my issues (see: handy bolded parts) with this part of the mission statement – and many scientists seem to agree with me, even those on the Left. 

There’s also the official March for Science Twitter, which contains gems such as this:

To the surprise of no one to the right of Bernie Sanders, this march was nothing more than a chance for the left to virtue signal about how much they love science – while simultaneously denying scientific fact whenever it disagrees with their narrative.

The left cannot say that they hate science, because even though they’ve taken over the rest of academia and culture and have been continually attempting to push post modernism as the dominant worldview, we have still retained at least a nominal interest in objective reality in this country.

So they don’t say they hate science. The left is a lot smarter than that. When reality doesn’t suit them, they simply change it amongst themselves, and then they attempt to trick all of us into accepting this slow unraveling of reality by exploiting our very humanity. Whether it’s our desire for compassion or our desire to fit in or our desire for something else emotion-based: they hit us right in the feels.

When science finds truths that are inconvenient to the left, they have to make sure  that acknowledging that truth would make you a bad person. So, in this case, the left has chosen a pet cause – climate change – and equated it with Science™. If you agree with the scientific consensus on climate change, you Love Science™ And Are A Good Person. If you have questions or criticisms of it, you are a Bad Person Who Hates Science™ And Progress.

The leftists are really are good at playing chess, and we need to stop playing checkers.

The March For Science Doesn't Understand Science

The sort of emotional image that is commonly used.

Let me be clear here: I am not arguing for or against man-made climate change being real.  The point I am  trying to make here would be the same if we were talking about the Theory of Gravity, which is, obviously, far less contentious.

Scientific consensus doesn’t mean what most people think it means. Now, bear with me while I explain my greater point, because I may get some finer points wrong and I’d love to hear about it if I do.

Scientific consensus occurs when almost all scientists have stopped arguing about something. That’s it. For us normal, non science types (a category I fall into – also, I hate math), it is a pretty good indicator that we know X about Y. For example, if virtually all biologists have stated for decades that there are two genders and that a new human life is created at conception, it should make you raise an eyebrow when some liberal professors in California (with no actual observable and testable research) tell you otherwise.

However, science itself is not a process that works by consensus. If one liberal professor in California can hypothesize and observe and repeatedly observe ten genders existing, and other scientists can also observe the same reality and cannot counter that hypothesis, then that liberal professor is right.

Even if Ze is the only person on earth who acknowledges it.

Truth is out there, independent of politics and social justice and “diverse perspectives”. And if we are going to find out what the truth is, this politicizing nonsense has to stop.

Whatever my personal (and admittedly ignorant, most indifferent) views on the subject of climate change are, I will say this much about this dangerous anti-science march masquerading as champions for truth:

It is not “anti-science” to question a scientific consensus and attempt to conduct research to discredit an accepted idea. It’s just the opposite. 

Facebook Comments

About the Author

Stefanie MacWilliams
Stefanie MacWilliams is a dissident Canadian millennial, mom, buffalo sauce afficianado, and right-wing political troublemaker. She co-owns (and writes for), hosts the Right Millennial show on Youtube, and can be found frequently on her twitter account @StefMacwilliams or you can email her at