Scientific American: "Antiscience Beliefs Jeopardize U.S. Democracy"

[Skybird]

Link: Scientific American essay

Disillusionizing.

In Brief

A large number of major party contenders for political office this year took antiscience positions against evolution, human-induced climate change, vaccines, stem cell research, and more.

Such positions are surprising because the economy is such a big factor in this election, and half the economic growth since World War II can be traced to innovations in science and technology.

Partisans at both ends of the political spectrum have been guilty of science denialism. But the Republican version is particularly dangerous because it attacks the validity of science itself.

U.S. voters must push candidates and elected officials to express their views on the major science questions facing the nation or risk losing out to those countries with reality-based policies.

[August]

Oh Skybird, what would you do without us to judge?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by August

Oh Skybird, what would you do without us to judge?

Going after the EU, Germany, the Euro, corrupted politicians, economic lobbyists, predatory capitalists, politically correct good-doers, gender-engineers, Islam, my new extremely noisy neighbours who after three months already are at war with half of the street.

Sorry if this disappoints you, but America is not the only but just one of several points on the list.

BTW, I am neither the editor nor the owner of the Scientific American. Despite the misleading title, last time I checked it was still an American-made publication.

[August]

Originally Posted by Skybird

BTW, I am neither the editor nor the owner of the Scientific American. Despite the misleading title, last time I checked it was still an American-made publication.

So? It's a German posting it. Who made you the judge of us or anyone else?

[Betonov]

Originally Posted by August

So? It's a German posting it. Who made you the judge of us or anyone else?

Because the same crap is happening in your, mine, his... every country that isnt a theocracy.

But, the situation may be unpleasant, it's not catastrophic. Science is not hindered by religions. Apart from stem cell research, which science managed to adapt by researching other sources than fetuses.
All this anti-science talk is a way to be loud. pro-science people will just need to be louder

A smart believer will suport science, a dumb atheist will still not contribute

[yubba]

If there was a sure cure for cancer, there would be billions lost in the drug industry, look what's going on in the energy industry in America, even I was dumded down years ago that we had no oil here, what a suprise that we have so much under our feet and we have so many denying the fact, and you know what,, global warming is really cause by all those windmills slowing the atmosphere down so it can't cool its self not to mention how many birds that are killed. If you want to get rid of co2 in the air grow more trees and stop these third world countries from cutting down their forest to make charcoal. I think some where it says we are ranked 7th in the worlds economy and we fell out of the top ten prosperious nations in the world.

[August]

Originally Posted by Betonov

Because the same crap is happening in your, mine, his... every country that isnt a theocracy.
Well, in your defence, he could have written in the title ''western democracy''

Skybird sees himself as an authority of just about everything. For the past 7 years that I've been reading his posts here i've found that he loves to cherry pick negative articles in order to pronounce his judgements as if they actually had any value.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by gimpy117

...candidates have to pretend that the world is 6,000 years old just to get a vote.

It's silly to expect our technological advantage to continue at this rate

Don't worry about it. It's all smoke and mirrors.

This.

Originally Posted by Betonov

But, the situation may be unpleasant, it's not catastrophic. Science is not hindered by religions. Apart from stem cell research, which science managed to adapt by researching other sources than fetuses.
All this anti-science talk is a way to be loud. pro-science people will just need to be louder

Very good point.

A smart believer will support science, a dumb atheist will still not contribute.

Even better point.

Pass the maple syrup.

[Penguin]

Once you had maple syrup on your pancakes or french toast, you'll can never accept a substitute again and have a mild contempt for folks who put powdered sugar on it.

But what do I say, as a Kraut I have no right to discuss North American food... - just as Americans have no right to discuss German food like Hamburgers...

Back off-topic:

Originally Posted by Betonov

Science is not hindered by religions.

Well, if religous nutters gain too much political influence, then it can become a problem. Much research is still funded by the state. Just imagine where space exploration would be without government funding during the 50s and 60s, private spaceflight is still pretty young.

However I am glad that there are still enough people who have no problem with believe and science, even in crusty institutions like the Vatikan: Intelligent Design belittles God, Vatican Observatory director says

Science is and should be seen as “completely neutral” on the issue of the theistic or atheistic implications of scientific results, says Father George V. Coyne, director of the Vatican Observatory, while noting that “science and religion are totally separate pursuits.”

Very wise words - unfortunately Coyne lost his job shortly after this statement, allegedly because Benedict was no real fan of him.

[Herr-Berbunch]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Despite the misleading title, last time I checked it was still an American-made publication.