End the Politicization of Science

[Si modo]

I know and understand that, but the old saying, "You can't have your cake and eat it too" applies here.

If they want to continue to receive grants they are going to have to deal with the politicization of science.

Immie

Actually, one can have cake and eat it too, of that's the analogy you wish to use.

The grant approval process is one thing (and the monies allocated for them), policy based on science is another. The latter is the intent of the petition.

I have to disagree with you on the basis of my first post. Politicians are not going to fund anything they do not expect to get a return on. They sure as hell are not going to do it out of the goodness of their hearts or for the goodness of mankind.

Immie

I'm not arguing that at all nor is FAS.

 

[California Girl]

Interesting thread. And fascinating that those who bring politics into it are not the right. Hmmmmm. Let's evaluate that evidence.


I signed the petition.

 

[Wry Catcher]

From the Web Site of the FAS:



Over the next century the earth’s resilience and adaptive capabilities will be stressed by the demands of global climate change, environmental degradation, a population increase of two billion people, and the accompanying increased resource and energy demand. These stresses will place an additional burden upon the earth’s natural systems and the processes and resources that drive these systems. Future system scarcities and imbalances represent a security concern with the potential to destabilize and weaken existing political, social, and economic structures. And as these natural systems are inherently highly interdependent, it is necessary for them to be analyzed and considered systemically.

The Earth Systems Program seeks to address these issues by developing and promoting sustainable, scientifically sound, and inclusive solutions, policies, and technological developments. To meet this goal the Earth Systems Program will work in the follow project areas:

1. Communication. Improve dialogue and deliberation over key environmental issues and challenges by building trust and communication between scientists, policy makers, and the public.

2. Research. Better scientific understanding of key socio-environmental and earth systems issues through undertaking and supporting systemic, multidisciplinary research.

3. Tools. Create tools to aid researchers, scientists, and policymakers in analyzing complex issues and systems.

4. Policy. Promote policy to further national and international environmental and energy sustainability and security and advocate for political processes that engage key stakeholders and scientists in deliberations.

5. Partnerships. Develop long term, multidisciplinary collaborations and partnerships between U.S and foreign scientists and engineers to solve key environmental and technical issues.


Now, honestly, which policies best meet these goals: those of Bush&Co and the GOP, or those of Obama&Co and the Democratic Party?.
To suggest politics will not determine our future is naive at best.

 

[California Girl]

From the Web Site of the FAS:



Over the next century the earth’s resilience and adaptive capabilities will be stressed by the demands of global climate change, environmental degradation, a population increase of two billion people, and the accompanying increased resource and energy demand. These stresses will place an additional burden upon the earth’s natural systems and the processes and resources that drive these systems. Future system scarcities and imbalances represent a security concern with the potential to destabilize and weaken existing political, social, and economic structures. And as these natural systems are inherently highly interdependent, it is necessary for them to be analyzed and considered systemically.

The Earth Systems Program seeks to address these issues by developing and promoting sustainable, scientifically sound, and inclusive solutions, policies, and technological developments. To meet this goal the Earth Systems Program will work in the follow project areas:

1. Communication. Improve dialogue and deliberation over key environmental issues and challenges by building trust and communication between scientists, policy makers, and the public.

2. Research. Better scientific understanding of key socio-environmental and earth systems issues through undertaking and supporting systemic, multidisciplinary research.

3. Tools. Create tools to aid researchers, scientists, and policymakers in analyzing complex issues and systems.

4. Policy. Promote policy to further national and international environmental and energy sustainability and security and advocate for political processes that engage key stakeholders and scientists in deliberations.

5. Partnerships. Develop long term, multidisciplinary collaborations and partnerships between U.S and foreign scientists and engineers to solve key environmental and technical issues.


Now, honestly, which policies best meet these goals: those of Bush&Co and the GOP, or those of Obama&Co and the Democratic Party?.
To suggest politics will not determine our future is naive at best.

Because I am capable of seeing facts, I would say the answer is that neither side meets those goals. Because you are a partisan hack, you will think it's Obama & Co.

 

[Si modo]

....
Now, honestly, which policies best meet these goals: those of Bush&Co and the GOP, or those of Obama&Co and the Democratic Party?.
To suggest politics will not determine our future is naive at best.

And, yet another.

Damn, the irony is amazing.

 

[California Girl]

....
Now, honestly, which policies best meet these goals: those of Bush&Co and the GOP, or those of Obama&Co and the Democratic Party?.
To suggest politics will not determine our future is naive at best.

And, yet another.

Damn, the irony is amazing.

I don't think they see it, mo chara. Too partisan, ya think?

 

[rdean]

....

If you believe that the disregard of science is a threat to the future security of the United States and the international community, then please sign our petition below to show your support!

By signing the petition below you also pledge to spend five minutes talking about this issue with a friend or a stranger. Only through factual, non-partisan dialogue, can we fight against the politicization of science, and create a more informed world!

....

And the petition:

End the War on Science

Greetings,

We, the undersigned, believe public policy decisions are best made under the guidance of scientific inquiry and factual reason, not politics.

We petition the international community to end the politicization of science, by taking the following actions:

• Declare that good policy comes from informed decisions based on facts.
• Support scientists and engineers running for public office.
• Bring serious scientists together to solve the most challenging issues through non-partisan technical analysis.
• Stop exploiting differences in public opinion on science-based issues by playing partisan politics and relying on anti-science views.
• Pledge to bring an end to invoking misrepresented expertise to justify a course of action.
• Minimize interaction with advocacy groups that increasingly rely on anti-science experts to justify their issue stance.

To further show our passion for this cause, we pledge to spend five minutes today discussing this issue with a friend or a stranger. It is our belief that it is only through factual, non-partisan dialogue, can we fight against the politicization of science, and create a more informed world!

[Your name]​

[Emphasis added]

FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS

What a damn good idea.

The only people who would even consider something like this are Democrat.

Facts? Yea, like "magical creation" and "Noah's Ark".

I thought you were a scientist? You don't write like one. I know you think this is an attack, and maybe it is. But you can't seriously believe the Republican Party is pro science? Except perhaps when paying Democrats to create Weapons of Mass Destruction. And even then, they don't call it "science". Instead, they call it, "Technology". See how neat and clean? Kind of leaves out "evolution".

 

[Si modo]

....

If you believe that the disregard of science is a threat to the future security of the United States and the international community, then please sign our petition below to show your support!

By signing the petition below you also pledge to spend five minutes talking about this issue with a friend or a stranger. Only through factual, non-partisan dialogue, can we fight against the politicization of science, and create a more informed world!

....

And the petition:

End the War on Science

Greetings,

We, the undersigned, believe public policy decisions are best made under the guidance of scientific inquiry and factual reason, not politics.

We petition the international community to end the politicization of science, by taking the following actions:

• Declare that good policy comes from informed decisions based on facts.
• Support scientists and engineers running for public office.
• Bring serious scientists together to solve the most challenging issues through non-partisan technical analysis.
• Stop exploiting differences in public opinion on science-based issues by playing partisan politics and relying on anti-science views.
• Pledge to bring an end to invoking misrepresented expertise to justify a course of action.
• Minimize interaction with advocacy groups that increasingly rely on anti-science experts to justify their issue stance.

To further show our passion for this cause, we pledge to spend five minutes today discussing this issue with a friend or a stranger. It is our belief that it is only through factual, non-partisan dialogue, can we fight against the politicization of science, and create a more informed world!

[Your name]​

[Emphasis added]

FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS

What a damn good idea.

The only people who would even consider something like this are Democrat.

....

More irony.

How very, very sad for science.

 

[Wry Catcher]

From the Web Site of the FAS:



Over the next century the earth’s resilience and adaptive capabilities will be stressed by the demands of global climate change, environmental degradation, a population increase of two billion people, and the accompanying increased resource and energy demand. These stresses will place an additional burden upon the earth’s natural systems and the processes and resources that drive these systems. Future system scarcities and imbalances represent a security concern with the potential to destabilize and weaken existing political, social, and economic structures. And as these natural systems are inherently highly interdependent, it is necessary for them to be analyzed and considered systemically.

The Earth Systems Program seeks to address these issues by developing and promoting sustainable, scientifically sound, and inclusive solutions, policies, and technological developments. To meet this goal the Earth Systems Program will work in the follow project areas:

1. Communication. Improve dialogue and deliberation over key environmental issues and challenges by building trust and communication between scientists, policy makers, and the public.

2. Research. Better scientific understanding of key socio-environmental and earth systems issues through undertaking and supporting systemic, multidisciplinary research.

3. Tools. Create tools to aid researchers, scientists, and policymakers in analyzing complex issues and systems.

4. Policy. Promote policy to further national and international environmental and energy sustainability and security and advocate for political processes that engage key stakeholders and scientists in deliberations.

5. Partnerships. Develop long term, multidisciplinary collaborations and partnerships between U.S and foreign scientists and engineers to solve key environmental and technical issues.


Now, honestly, which policies best meet these goals: those of Bush&Co and the GOP, or those of Obama&Co and the Democratic Party?.
To suggest politics will not determine our future is naive at best.

Because I am capable of seeing facts, I would say the answer is that neither side meets those goals. Because you are a partisan hack, you will think it's Obama & Co.

I do believe Obama&Co have ideas consistent with the goals. What I cannot conceive is how someone cannot. Maybe, rather than call me names, you might post something which suggests your read the five points, understood the five points and actually thought about them. Otherwise, I might conclude you are what you called me.

 

[rdean]

And the petition:

End the War on Science

Greetings,

We, the undersigned, believe public policy decisions are best made under the guidance of scientific inquiry and factual reason, not politics.

We petition the international community to end the politicization of science, by taking the following actions:

• Declare that good policy comes from informed decisions based on facts.
• Support scientists and engineers running for public office.
• Bring serious scientists together to solve the most challenging issues through non-partisan technical analysis.
• Stop exploiting differences in public opinion on science-based issues by playing partisan politics and relying on anti-science views.
• Pledge to bring an end to invoking misrepresented expertise to justify a course of action.
• Minimize interaction with advocacy groups that increasingly rely on anti-science experts to justify their issue stance.

To further show our passion for this cause, we pledge to spend five minutes today discussing this issue with a friend or a stranger. It is our belief that it is only through factual, non-partisan dialogue, can we fight against the politicization of science, and create a more informed world!

[Your name]​

[Emphasis added]

FEDERATION OF AMERICAN SCIENTISTS

What a damn good idea.

The only people who would even consider something like this are Democrat.

....

More irony.

How very, very sad for science.

Sad, very sad. And true.

Sad for science.

Sad for the country.

Republicans are the reason we are lagging the rest of the world. They don't defend science with "magical creation". They drag down ALL of science. Even you have to admit that.

 

[Si modo]

From the Web Site of the FAS:



Over the next century the earth’s resilience and adaptive capabilities will be stressed by the demands of global climate change, environmental degradation, a population increase of two billion people, and the accompanying increased resource and energy demand. These stresses will place an additional burden upon the earth’s natural systems and the processes and resources that drive these systems. Future system scarcities and imbalances represent a security concern with the potential to destabilize and weaken existing political, social, and economic structures. And as these natural systems are inherently highly interdependent, it is necessary for them to be analyzed and considered systemically.

The Earth Systems Program seeks to address these issues by developing and promoting sustainable, scientifically sound, and inclusive solutions, policies, and technological developments. To meet this goal the Earth Systems Program will work in the follow project areas:

1. Communication. Improve dialogue and deliberation over key environmental issues and challenges by building trust and communication between scientists, policy makers, and the public.

2. Research. Better scientific understanding of key socio-environmental and earth systems issues through undertaking and supporting systemic, multidisciplinary research.

3. Tools. Create tools to aid researchers, scientists, and policymakers in analyzing complex issues and systems.

4. Policy. Promote policy to further national and international environmental and energy sustainability and security and advocate for political processes that engage key stakeholders and scientists in deliberations.

5. Partnerships. Develop long term, multidisciplinary collaborations and partnerships between U.S and foreign scientists and engineers to solve key environmental and technical issues.


Now, honestly, which policies best meet these goals: those of Bush&Co and the GOP, or those of Obama&Co and the Democratic Party?.
To suggest politics will not determine our future is naive at best.

Because I am capable of seeing facts, I would say the answer is that neither side meets those goals. Because you are a partisan hack, you will think it's Obama & Co.

I do believe Obama&Co have ideas consistent with the goals. What I cannot conceive is how someone cannot. Maybe, rather than call me names, you might post something which suggests your read the five points, understood the five points and actually thought about them. Otherwise, I might conclude you are what you called me.

The problem is, Wry, no one but you has suggested that politics will not detemine our future. FAS cares not what party one likes, they do care that policy decisions needing scientific input maintain the scientific integrity of that input.

Do try not to be so pathetically ironic in this matter.

 

[Si modo]

The only people who would even consider something like this are Democrat.

....

More irony.

How very, very sad for science.

....

Republicans are the reason we are lagging the rest of the world. They don't defend science with "magical creation". They drag down ALL of science. Even you have to admit that.

I would suggest you don't sign the petition.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Because I am capable of seeing facts, I would say the answer is that neither side meets those goals. Because you are a partisan hack, you will think it's Obama & Co.

I do believe Obama&Co have ideas consistent with the goals. What I cannot conceive is how someone cannot. Maybe, rather than call me names, you might post something which suggests your read the five points, understood the five points and actually thought about them. Otherwise, I might conclude you are what you called me.

The problem is, Wry, no one but you has suggested that politics will not detemine our future. FAS cares not what party one likes, they do care that policy decisions needing scientific input maintain the scientific integrity of that input.

Do try not to be so pathetically ironic in this matter.

Thanks for sharing (how pathetically sarcastic of me). The question was asked of CG, please don't respond to any of my posts in the future.

 

[Big Fitz]

How I wish we could use our best knowledge to decide our futures.

Science , History and all higher education are hated by the right.

Only the truly moronic really believe this. Even those on the right don't believe that of the left, although they do believe they will TWIST science for political ends because the ends justify the means.

 

[Si modo]

I do believe Obama&Co have ideas consistent with the goals. What I cannot conceive is how someone cannot. Maybe, rather than call me names, you might post something which suggests your read the five points, understood the five points and actually thought about them. Otherwise, I might conclude you are what you called me.

The problem is, Wry, no one but you has suggested that politics will not detemine our future. FAS cares not what party one likes, they do care that policy decisions needing scientific input maintain the scientific integrity of that input.

Do try not to be so pathetically ironic in this matter.

Thanks for sharing (how pathetically sarcastic of me). The question was asked of CG, please don't respond to any of my posts in the future.

So, you want another to reply to your strawman, eh?

Why?

 

[Big Fitz]

Don't let rdean see this!

Booger!!!

 

[Wry Catcher]

Partway through an argument, the arguer goes off on a tangent, raising a side issue that distracts the audience from what's really at stake. Often, the arguer never returns to the original issue. Such is the case with Si modo, who uses ad hominem attacks as red herrings. A practice which she employed so often on the DemocracyForums - even after she was warned to stop - it resulted in her ban from that message board.

 

[California Girl]

I do believe Obama&Co have ideas consistent with the goals. What I cannot conceive is how someone cannot. Maybe, rather than call me names, you might post something which suggests your read the five points, understood the five points and actually thought about them. Otherwise, I might conclude you are what you called me.

The problem is, Wry, no one but you has suggested that politics will not detemine our future. FAS cares not what party one likes, they do care that policy decisions needing scientific input maintain the scientific integrity of that input.

Do try not to be so pathetically ironic in this matter.

Thanks for sharing (how pathetically sarcastic of me). The question was asked of CG, please don't respond to any of my posts in the future.

I don't see any question addressed to me. Did I miss it?

 

[Wry Catcher]

The problem is, Wry, no one but you has suggested that politics will not detemine our future. FAS cares not what party one likes, they do care that policy decisions needing scientific input maintain the scientific integrity of that input.

Do try not to be so pathetically ironic in this matter.

Thanks for sharing (how pathetically sarcastic of me). The question was asked of CG, please don't respond to any of my posts in the future.

I don't see any question addressed to me. Did I miss it?

Please see post #49

 

[Si modo]

The problem is, Wry, no one but you has suggested that politics will not detemine our future. FAS cares not what party one likes, they do care that policy decisions needing scientific input maintain the scientific integrity of that input.

Do try not to be so pathetically ironic in this matter.

Thanks for sharing (how pathetically sarcastic of me). The question was asked of CG, please don't respond to any of my posts in the future.

I don't see any question addressed to me. Did I miss it?

No. It was a strawman and had nothing to do with what you said, what I said, or what FAS says.

I wouldn't bother.

Thanks for signing the petition.