If you cannot see that the March for Science is part of the problem of the politicization of science, then you are lost all the same.
Climate Science denialist PR campaigns by Koch Industries are politicization, and it feels filthy wrong that we're overwhelmingly pointing fingers at the scientists and grassroots actors responding to these campaigns instead of the groups publishing and hosting the lies.
Fortunately science is about facts, not feelings.
Saying the march is part of the problem does not mean that the lobbyists are not also part of the problem. It also does not mean the march is a _root cause_ of the problem.
It just acknowledges that the march is a part of the politicization of science, which it is.
In the words of the leader of the republican party: "Climate Change is a Chinese hoax."
This isn't the fault of scientists in any way, shape, or form. This is a direct result of society, for some reason, organizing its political parties along "pro-intellectualism" vs "anti-intellectualism" lines. How can scientists fight back against this without being political? Should they just "deal with it?"
And scientific knowledge has political implications because it tells us about the world around us, and politics is the process by which we decide how our laws will adapt to and affect that world.
None of that is inherently negative!
However, when political expedience and facts conflict, we should adapt the politics to the facts, and not the other way around.
That's what the "march for science" was about.
*ps sorry for any English mistake, as it's not my first language.