<center>https://cdn.pixabay.com/photo/2015/11/04/14/44/white-house-1022633_1280.jpg</center> 

The '*Scientists March On Washington*' which has since been renamed to '*March for Science*,' started around Jan 23rd of this year on Facebook and has quickly gained a lot of support, with now almost 1 million members signing-up and agreeing to join-in or support the march. 

The movement is said to be fueled by growing concerns regarding the Trump administration, and concerns like their stance on Climate Change, 'alternative facts', and more. The group, *March for Science*, describe themselves as being a diverse and nonpartisan group that are marching in a public call for science that supports the 'common good' and they also seek to have policymakers, yet again, enact (even more) laws, about policies that are supposed to be within the public interest. 

<center>http://assets1.bigthink.com/system/idea_thumbnails/62324/size_896/Science_protester.jpg?1485734315 </center> 
# Critics 

Some have labeled this upcoming march as the “science rebellion against Trump” and the list of those supporting the movement continues to grow. However, not every scientist is happy to hear about the march; one wrote in to the *New York Times* that the plan was a bad idea. He brought up a great point/concern that if they move forward with the plan for this march, that it might only reinforce the notion that conservatives currently hold which is that science is an interest group and seek to politicize their data. 

Despite concerns over the march though, they are going to move forward with it regardless. And we can assume that climate change will be just one of the big topics that will be mentioned by the activists involved. 

<center> https://cdn.pixabay.com/photo/2016/03/31/20/18/crowd-1295674_1280.png</center> 

# Admitting Faults

<center> https://images.gr-assets.com/hostedimages/1454432426ra/17961620.gif </center> 

Science very frequently crosses over from repeatable, observable experiments (honest objective truth), and instead often moves these days toward conjecture and speculation. There is also reason to pause and question who funds what studies and what interest they might have in seeing a particular outcome to that study. We know that we have been lied to by scientists and doctors before, but that doesn't mean that every single one of them is a liar or seeking to be deceptive. There have been many times throughout history that the majority consensus had been wrong, so I think it's wise to be cautious rather than to blindly accept and root for the majority consensus of the day. Science is an effective tool that when used properly can help us to seek and know objective truths. 

#### Real science is about honest discussion and trying to seek truth. It shouldn't be about bullying and shaming people who don't readily accept the majority-held consensus. 

There currently has been no mention of when the march is going to take place, but they say that the announcement will take place within the next few days. Until then, people can check the website or follow the associated social media accounts in order to find out more information. 

Pics:
pixabay
Spin

Sources:
http://www.thespec.com/news-story/7095888-march-for-science-expected-to-hit-hamilton-streets/
https://www.marchforscience.com/
http://bigthink.com/robby-berman/scientists-plan-a-march-on-dc-to-speak-up-for-science-and-facts
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/a-scientists-march-on-washington-is-a-bad-idea.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kavinsenapathy/2017/01/31/can-the-march-for-science-stand-for-objective-non-partisan-truth/#1bcffad85cd8