Why we need to impeach trump

He is now unironically against evidence and science. If you aren't aware, the CDC has revised much of the data in recent years Sup Forums still uses to push homophobia and racism. I'd love to see any of you morons who voted for him try and justify this

The fuck is that goblin thing?

Is Trump waging a secret war against the Good People?

It's a product of Jew Science, the fabled "Eurasian-Negroid" Kalergi dreamed about. His handler is the Jewish Spiritual Nobility.

This is just a dismissal of lazy leftist buzzwords.

These words are only used to push leftist political agenda, with the exception of the word "fetus", which could prove slightly problematic in terms of discussion of infections diseases which cause congenital problems, but because the ban only applies to budgetary proposals, it should not be a big problem, as their are many alternatives.

>science-based
>evidence-based
>"leftist buzzwords"
The actual state of America

it's so the CDC doesn't propose a budget for things it has nothing to do with

Why not just show the evidence and science instead of just saying those terms?
Those buzzwords allow for the use of bullshit postmodern studies from the social sciences that perpetuate myths like microagressions and transgenderism.

I'm happy that your not. I'm not necessarily on the side of the u.s.a. im on the side of Hitler.

yes, those are actual buzzwords used when you don't have any real evidence to support your position

saying something is "science-based" or "evidence-based" is literally just a way to introduce something without going into details, aka so that you believe it has merit without realizing that it is worthless.

>Science-based
Translation: Not based on actual science. We looked at some pseudo-science and let our feelings do the rest.

He’s only banning the phrase, you can still say based on science

Is 969 genders science-based?

>Is Trump waging a secret war against the Good People?


He is waging a war against the people who want to control and manipulate the good people with emotional appealing authoritarianpropaganda.

How the fuck can something be evidence-based if it's not based on evidence. Like think for a half a second about what you're saying.
If something isn't evidence-based, then what is it? Wouldn't non-evidence-based just be complete nonsense? It's completely out of place with the other words.

Ab ins gas Jude.

...

Why not just use the word "sciencey" while you're at it? Actual science, actual evidence, is self-evident and doesn't require Newspeak to act as thought-terminating cliches.

Microcephaly (small headedness), possibly from the zika virus.

But is the old version of this thread even dead yet?

In all my years reading primary scientific literature, I have never seen anyone use the phrases "science-based" or "evidence-based." Just present the data and reference the source. Anything else is a waste of time and adds nothing since the fact you are presenting the information should imply it is, to the best of your knowledge, true.

Because there's a difference between demonstrate evidential value and just saying the phrase 'evidence-based' to push a bullshit agenda.
Not being allowed to say the empty phrase 'evidence-based' does not mean you're not allowed to use evidence, obviously.

You're a complete fucking retard. You can USE EVIDENCE without calling your findings "EVIDENCE-BASED". It is a fucking buzzword used to attempt to silence findings which dissent against leftist dogma.

>How the fuck can something be evidence-based if it's not based on evidence
It's a placeholder word used when you don't actually have evidence so that you don't have to present it to the reader. Or so that when you do provide evidence you know is weak, they're likely to spend less time looking at it.

The evidence you present should speak for itself. You only put "science-based" before something so that at first glance people think it has some sort of credibility when it doesn't actually have a basis in science.

>banning words
>Sup Forums supports this

w e w lad. y'all sure are a buncha fucking snowflakes.

>says the literal fascist with meme flag

>evidence/science based

It's a federal agency that has been pushing a marxian agenda and wants more public funding.

This. It's fucking newspeak.

>Why we
Who is "we"

>need to impeach trump
He's broken no laws.
You don't have the votes to impeach.

>He is now unironically against evidence and science.
Good. Almost all science is politicized anyways.

> If you aren't aware, the CDC has revised much of the data in recent years
I don't trust politicized science and I trust government politicized science even less.

>Sup Forums still uses to push homophobia and racism
There is literally nothing wrong with being pro-White.

>I'd love to see any of you morons who voted for him try and justify this
I didn't vote for him and I still have no problem with that.

Now post more than once you fucking coward.

Beautiful. Stop defending degeneracy and leftist liberal propaganda. Your academia needs a fucking beatdown.

>(((evidence)))
>(((science)))
I trust the word of Trump more than any scientist. If they're so smart, why are most of them so poor?

The way those words are used is like based on a true story.

FETUS

IS NOW

A BUZZWORD

Cheetus

Where is the joke?

they are, go ask any progressive to talk about their favorite pronouns

(((science)))

>entitlement
>diversity
Good choice, desu.

shut the fuck up you n****r

Impeach him? Lol, he is fucking brilliant. He can zero in on issues that his base gives zero fucks about while simultaneously making the left flip out.

So his base gives zero fucks about a Science Focused Organization not being able to use the technical term fetus?

WTF I HATE THE FIRST AMENDMENT NOW!

There are ways around fetus which are more technical with regards to the actual research being done. Embryo, zygote, Carnegie stages, listing embryonic age in weeks, etc. I imagine this was done to try and pacify the uninformed religious fanatics without hindering research in any noticeable way.

So in your "free country" scientists now have to talk around a term because right wing crazies say that its off limits and you are defending that?

The Right Wing has officially gone full retard.

Joke is that he turned 1 million into billions. He's really not an idiot

user, I rarely if ever see the word fetus appear in current scientific literature as is because it is so politically charged compared to embryo. This doesn't hinder anyone and you are making a mountain out of a mole hill

>scientists now have to
This rule applies to budgetary proposals of the CDC and nothing else you fucking illiterate moron

"Its fine if they ban words, the government can come over and put a muzzle on me and its cool if the muzzle only stops me from saying words I use rarely...its all fine"

...do you think the budget has SOMETHING to do with the findings of the CDC's scientists? Or do you think the budgetary publishing are just about fucking how many pens to order? I don't give a shit if its the janitorial division: When you start defending the banning of words you are officially off the reservation

Snowflake libs are so triggered already but trump doesn't oppose suicide so all of us real Americans are going to kill ourselves and die happily knowing these leftist retards will flip out! I'm so sick of winning!

those are favorite terms used by leftists who have no argument, I've read all types of arguments of leftists on transgenderism, race, crime, IQ etc and they always use "science-based."

I'm pretty sure there is like a handbook out there for terms and arguments you have to use if you're a leftist, because they all sound the same.

>banning buzzwords

simple but genius

Lefties only like science when they can use it to push their agenda. When they are presented with data they don’t like, they start doing mental gymnastics to explain why the results are wrong.

>slippery slope arguments are fine, so long as I am the one who makes them
Look, I get your point, and I feel your heart is in the right place. However, we don't know why these words were placed on the list and are just speculating and drawing conclusions without full information. As I said, there are less politically charged, more technically correct, alternatives which can be used in place of fetus and should be encouraged wherever possible. While I personally don't agree with the idea of banning the word myself, I don't necessarily see it as the descent into Orwellian style though policing that you are making it out to be.

>...do you think the budget has SOMETHING to do with the findings of the CDC's scientists?
Of course, but that doesn't mean they must or should use the word 'fetus'
>When you start defending the banning of words you are officially off the reservation
He says with the democrat donkey, and without a hint of self awareness.

So your mealy mouthed excuse for the government slapping a muzzle on the CDC is that we don't know why they did it yet and so its fine?

That is the grand sum of your defense? So if the government does anything and doesn't reveal why and there are clear political motivations for such things then its fine as long as they say: "We totally did this for a good reason, we'll tell you all about it at a later date"?

Please list the words that the democratic party has banned from public usage. The list will quickly elucidate what level of moron you are

>Please list the words that the democratic party has banned from public usage.
please explain how banning the CDC from using a specific list of terms in its budgetary proposal is banning a word from public use

>So your mealy mouthed excuse for the government slapping a muzzle on the CDC is that we don't know why they did it yet and so its fine?

keep whining you little faggot
>stop using meaningless leftist buzzwords, CDC
why do you have an issue with this if you aren't a leftist faggot?

Ah, so that's where the goalpost landed for you, so next week it can be in non budgetary communication...and it will be fine right?

You hand-wave the idea of this being a slippery slope but where exactly is the line then?

Well reasoned argument

Who fucking cares?

Shareblue thread: sage.

The CDC is a branch of the federal government you dipshit. The federal government is allowed to choose what it says, and in whatever context they choose. If they started talking about censuring third party publications, then I would be worried, but are not and there is zero indication that they will or want to. The point of this move is to keep the CDC pointed towards its job and not stick its nose in other business, nothing more or less.

>We don't know why they did it yet and so it is fine
No, I just don't like jumping to conclusions based on incomplete information. But I suppose that is what separates scientists from the rest of society.

So long as we are over simplifying nuanced points, your entire argument boils down to, "all forms of censorship are wrong and there is absolutely no way that one could ever justify doing it." Personally, I prefer to not deal in absolutes, since that is a sure fire way to shove your foot in your mouth. I'm sure there are plenty of others here who would love to cherry pick examples to prove you wrong, but honestly I just don't have the time to continue to waste on a person who is so fanatically obstinate to even the notion that we live in varying shades of gray with no clear cut black or white

Why did they post a walking abortion with it? Is Trump banning these words supposed to lead to more of them somehow? If its supposed to lead to less then why is t hat bad?

The message that the federal government puts out can change, banning individual words is something entirely and conflating the two is the mark of someone being intellectually insincere

> But I suppose that is what separates scientists from the rest of society.

No, you have actually quite clearly come to a conclusion: The freedom of a science focused organization in the US to use technical terms hinges upon the agenda of whoever is currently in power. That is just a fantastic precedent to set, never going to be abused or misused at all.

>doubleplusgood
>thoughtcrime
>"state propaganda"
The actual state of Airstrip One.

>wow u think it's redundant to point out that something being billed as empirical should be founded on evidence? what a retard!

>The message that the federal government puts out can change, banning individual words is something [else] entirely
No it's not

MAGA!

Donald John Trump is the answer to decades of prayer and repentance.

>A democrat
>Talking about intellectual honesty

You are why people will die in a civil war.

If obabo wasn't impeached for wiretapping citizens then it will take a whole hell of a lot more to impeach trump.
Americans are lazy.