In this year’s Presidential campaign, we have seen little debate between candidates about science, even with an unprecedented movement to encourage them to debate. The science community is not of one mind about the wisdom of such a debate and there are good arguments on both sides. One argument I have heard that argues against the debate is the danger of politicizing science. Indeed I agree that it would be most unfortunate to have Republican chemistry, or Democratic physics and so forth. But I see little danger in that. I don’t really see that there are many electoral votes to get by praising one or another field of science or criticizing it. But, given that many issues that the public cares about health, energy and the environment, the economy, security and personal safety increasingly have scientific underpinnings, politics enters in, like it or not!
I favor such a debate; and here’s why. I believe that the importance of basic research in all fields of science and engineering will be endorsed by all serious candidates; they have said as much. When it comes to stem cells, climate change, renewable energy, teaching evolution in biology classes, there are real issues that the public is confused about and that have, therefore, become politicized. We owe it to the candidates and to the electorate to hear the views of our next President, who will mold his Administrative team around those views.
But, that’s just my opinion. I would be more interested in yours.
By Jared at 10:40 AM ON 08/01/08
The remedial center of attention concerning science may be off the Presidential campaign list of talk about due to the evolutionary depletion of normalcy in everyday American lives, however, science is actually heightened expression among our Governors in all 50 states including and not limited to Law, Medicine, Technology, Engineering, and etc. All these are in fact base formulas of our new energy independence goals and the more everyone knows the 101 Knock out punches of their own illiteracy, the better off we all as the humankind will all be.
In your entire opinion, I'm actually a big supporter and agree about the underpinnings of science being the base solution that has excelled us up the evolutionary scale of earth terrestrials.
Or are we just extras in this field of dreams among the matrix of Independence days & nights.
For review, let's take "stromatolites" for instance. The history channel aired darwinster mister claiming that our human ancestry was an indirect link to "stramotolites" because they actually played a big roll in the oxygenation of our planet some 4 billion years ago. Disagreeing the previous and agreeing the latter, that's the problem. As humans we inhale oxygen to assumely balance nitrogen while exhaling carbon dioxide.
Now, there's no real argument from my standpoint except common sense and the humor I find in teaching evolution and religion in biology. Both fail miserably, and I believe the answer is out there somewhere in some undisclosed x-file all pun intended for the teaching of evolution and/or religion as a biology.
The issue that really fascinated me although is that "stramotolites" might provide future answers for re-oxygenation processes with new developments in bio-engineered plant life to inhale more amounts of carbon dioxides and derivatives that overwhelm us today.
To re-iterate my own evolutionary acceleration(s), I often create mottos & slogans just to practice my business sense and one that fits here is:
"Prosperity for Earth's posterity is always today's answer yesterday"...
...and I created it on 7 | 4 | 7 in case your interested.
Ousty...
By Arn K at 3:45 AM ON 08/27/08
In fact we have Republican "science" right now and it is devastating. For example, the Republican governor of Louisiana is supporting the teaching of "intelligent design" in public school biology. We're back fighting the Scopes trial again more than 60 years later. Another example of Republican science: How long did it take for W to recognize global warming? The major oil companies publicly acknowledged global warming before W did.
Scientific research together with any other occupation is affected by politics. Scientific research is not immune just because it tries to be objective in its pursuits. The same applies to medicine and law of course. We cannot avoid politicizing scientific research by not talking about it. Instead we allow it to be corrupted by ignorant politicians.
Please see the following post for a summary of the 2008 Democratic Platform on science, technology and innovation: http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/54948/ For bloggers who cannot open this link, it begins as follows:
Upon last night's opening of the giant pep rally known as the Democratic National Convention, Democrats formally approved their platform, pledging to double federal funding of basic science research, lift the ban on funding embryonic stem cell research, and make the R&D tax credit permanent. The platform makes these promises against the backdrop of the current Administration's treatment of science policy.
"We will end the Bush Administration's war on science, restore scientific integrity, and return to evidence-based decision-making," the platform reads. "Research should be based on science, not ideology."
***
The science community needs to speak up and get involved in the political dialogue if it truly wants to pursue objective research and promote science in our schools and it needs to vote for Barack/Biden in November.
By Jared at 5:21 AM ON 09/04/08
A lot of people are mis-diagnosed in thinking that just because the foundation of ones belief, they have no given right to sciences. The same goes for people who are evolutionists without any true realization that in the last 4.5 billion years in the age of this planet, intelligent human society has only been here for about 30,000 years. "Intelligent Design" is all about the sciences and promoting the individual themselves to be like Stephen Hawkings and journey the mind to places you cannot reach so that "everyone" will have a better understanding to be wise with knowledge that is proven on fact that makes mystery relenquish itself as nothing more than a new theory solved.
Franklin, Edison, Einstein and today Bill Gates are some of the most brilliant illustrators of intellegent design, and just to better explain, George Washington Carver is a perfect example by clear definition:
A very gifted speaker, George Washington Carver's most popular story was the following:
I asked God, "Why did you make the universe, Lord?"
"Ask for something more in proportion to that little mind of yours," replied God.
"Why did you make the earth, Lord?" I asked.
"Your little mind still wants to know far too much. Ask for something more in proportion to that little mind of yours," replied God.
"Why did you make man, Lord?" I asked.
"Far too much. Far too much. Ask again," replied God.
"Explain to me why you made plants, Lord," I asked.
"Your little mind still wants to know far too much."
"The peanut?" I asked meekly.
"Yes! For your modest proportions I will grant you the mystery of the peanut. Take it inside your laboratory and separate it into water, fats, oils, gums, resins, sugars, starches and amino acids. Then recombine these under my three laws of compatibility, temperature and pressure. Then you will know why I made the peanut."
And that was what George the highly skilled botanist and chemist - did.
*In 1921 when George Washington Carver testified on uses of the peanut before the Ways and Means In 1921 when George Washington Carver testified on uses of the peanut before the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives the Committee Chairman grudgingly granted him 10 minutes. But not only was George a spell-binding speaker - mixing humor and fact with perfect timing - he had developed 300 uses of the peanut. Two hours later George finished his presentation to thunderous apIn 1921 when George Washington Carver testified on uses of the peanut before the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives the Committee Chairman grudgingly granted him 10 minutes. But not only was George a spell-binding speaker - mixing humor and fact with perfect timing - he had developed 300 uses of the peanut. Two hours later George finished his presentation.
Direct excerpt from: www.heroesofhistory.com/page50.html
*If you as an individual don't agree, well, that's your waste of life, however, these individuals are living proof!
Ousty...
By Delilah at 5:45 AM ON 11/07/08
Well said.
By Mercy at 2:45 PM ON 11/09/08
Well said.
By Dorothea Adkins at 4:53 AM ON 11/13/08
wfp93ev33fxmocfs
By Webmaster at 2:16 PM ON 11/15/08
Этот блог заслуживает похвалы. Обязательно напишу про него на закрытом форуме вебмастеров. Думаю, вебмастера согласятся со мной. Кстати вы можете присоединиться к сообществу вебмастеров, закрытый форум вебмасетров.