Bush and Science

Open discussion about any topic, as long as you abide by the rules of course!
Massive Quasars
Posts: 8696
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 8:00 am

Bush and Science

Post by Massive Quasars »

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/scienc ... index.html
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The voice of science is being stifled in the Bush administration, with fewer scientists heard in policy discussions and money for research and advanced training being cut, according to panelists at a national science meeting.

Speakers at the national meeting of the American Association for Advancement of Science expressed concern Sunday that some scientists in key federal agencies are being ignored or even pressured to change study conclusions that don't support policy positions.

The speakers also said that Bush's proposed 2005 federal budget is slashing spending for basic research and reducing investments in education designed to produce the nation's future scientists.

And there also was concern that increased restrictions and requirements for obtaining visas is diminishing the flow to the U.S. of foreign-born science students who have long been a major part of the American research community.

Rosina Bierbaum, dean of the University of Michigan School of Natural Resources and Environment, said the Bush administration has cut scientists out of some of the policy-making processes, particularly on environmental issues.

"In previous administrations, scientists were always at the table when regulations were being developed," she said. "Science never had the last voice, but it had a voice."

Issues on global warming, for instance, that achieved a firm scientific consensus in earlier years are now being questioned by Bush policy makers. Proven, widely accepted research is being ignored or disputed, she said.

Government policy papers issued prior to the Bush years moved beyond questioning the validity of global warming science and addressed ways of confronting or dealing with climate change.

Under Bush, said Bierbaum, the questioning of the proven science has become more important than finding ways to cope with climate change.

One result of such actions, said Neal Lane of Rice University, a former director of the National Science Foundation, is that "we don't really have a policy right now to deal with what everybody agrees is a serious problem."

Among scientists, said Lane, "there is quite a consensus in place that the Earth is warming and that humans are responsible for a considerable part of that" through the burning of fossil fuels.

And the science is clear, he said, that without action to control fossil fuel use, the warming will get worse and there will be climate events that "our species has not experienced before."

Asked for comment, White House spokesman Ken Lisaius said, "The president makes policy decisions based on what the best policies for the country are, not politics. People who suggest otherwise are ill-informed."

Kurt Gottfried of Cornell University and the Union of Concerned Scientists said a survey of scientists in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service found that about 42 percent said they felt pressured to not report publicly any findings that do not agree with Bush policies on endangered species.

He said almost a third of the Fish and Wildlife researchers said they were even pressured not to express within the agency any views in conflict with the Bush policies.

"This administration has distanced itself from scientific information," said Gottfried. He said this is part of a larger effort to let politics dominate pure science.

He said scientists in the Environmental Protection Agency have been pressured to change their research to keep it consistent with the Bush political position on environmental issues.

Because of such actions, he said, it has become more difficult for federal agencies to attract and retain top scientific talent. This becomes a critical issue, said Gottfried, because about 35 percent of EPA scientists will retire soon and the Bush administration can "mold the staff" of the agency through the hiring process.

Federal spending for research and development is significantly reduced under the proposed 2005 Bush budget, the speakers said.

"Overall the R&D budget is bad news," said Bierbaum.

She said the National Science Foundation funds for graduate students and for kindergarten through high school education has been slashed.

NASA has gotten a budget boost, but most of the new money will be going to the space shuttle, space station and Bush's plan to explore the moon and Mars. What is suffering is the space agency's scientific research efforts, she said.

"Moon and Mars is basically going to eat everybody's lunch," she said.

Lane said Bush's moon and Mars exploration effort has not excited the public and has no clear goals or plans.

He said Bush's moon-Mars initiative "was poorly carried out and the budget is not there to do the job so science (at NASA) will really get hurt."
Bush not only questions global warming, he questions evolution. His reservations are unimportant, the reservations of scientists are what matter.

I was initially optimistic about the Moon and Mars missions, but if it is going to stifle research in other areas for years to come then it may not be worth it.
Doombrain
Posts: 23227
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2000 7:00 am

Post by Doombrain »

Why am I not surprised. The sooner you lot get rid of him, the better for all of us.
User avatar
MKJ
Posts: 32582
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 8:00 am

Post by MKJ »

what a dork. someone fucking put a bullet through his head.. hes the first president who actually deserves it dammit :A
[url=http://profile.mygamercard.net/Emka+Jee][img]http://card.mygamercard.net/sig/Emka+Jee.jpg[/img][/url]
Massive Quasars
Posts: 8696
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Massive Quasars »

Doombrain wrote:Why am I not surprised. The sooner you lot get rid of him, the better for all of us.
I don't get a vote. Talk to farad.
Fender
Posts: 5876
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Fender »

WE WON"T NEED SCIENCE WHEN JESUS COMES BACK!!!!!
werldhed
Posts: 4926
Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 7:00 am

Post by werldhed »

That sums up what it's like...

Our lab had to put "We support our Troops" signs and promise to do "Homeland Defense" research in order to get money because the NIH is able to give out less money every year. Apparently it doesn't matter what research we do, as long as it somehow fits under "patriotic" research.
Last edited by werldhed on Tue Feb 22, 2005 4:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Doombrain
Posts: 23227
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2000 7:00 am

Post by Doombrain »

Massive Quasars wrote:
Doombrain wrote:Why am I not surprised. The sooner you lot get rid of him, the better for all of us.
I don't get a vote. Talk to farad.
Well he’s doing a great job of alienating the US from the rest of the world; why not start of the normal American people as well.
R00k
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2000 8:00 am

Post by R00k »

werldhed wrote:That sums up what it's like...

Our lab had to put "We support our Troops" signs and promise to do "Homeland Defense" research in order to get money because the NIH is able to give out less money every year. Apparently it doesn't matter what research we do, as long as it somehow fits under "patriotic" research.
Are you serious? What kind of lab is it? A university lab or something, or a private research lab with government supplements?
werldhed
Posts: 4926
Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 7:00 am

Post by werldhed »

R00k wrote:
werldhed wrote:That sums up what it's like...

Our lab had to put "We support our Troops" signs and promise to do "Homeland Defense" research in order to get money because the NIH is able to give out less money every year. Apparently it doesn't matter what research we do, as long as it somehow fits under "patriotic" research.
Are you serious? What kind of lab is it? A university lab or something, or a private research lab with government supplements?
It's a private non-profit cancer/immunology research lab that operates as the preclinical division of a cancer clinic. Our funding comes mostly from the NIH or from funds generated internally. However, lately, there's been less NIH money to go around, and just recently the clinic director announced that we would now be getting funding from the Dept. of Homeland Security and we had to put up the little "Support our Troops" signs at the same time. I can't think of any way that we can be considered to do "defense" research, but now we get money for it. Nothing has changed as far as what we do, but now the company's "official" stance is that we support the administration. All because Bush wants more money for defense, and less for basic science research. :icon27:
werldhed
Posts: 4926
Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 7:00 am

Post by werldhed »

I think we should announce that we actively research ways to prove that gays are scientifically incompatible for marriage. GWB would start throwing money at us.
R00k
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2000 8:00 am

Post by R00k »

Shit, you'd get an honorary position in the administration for something like that. :icon19:
Nightshade
Posts: 17020
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Nightshade »

Listen here, you filthy carpet-dwelling forehead slapper, JESUS CHRIST IS THE ONLY SCIENCE YOU NEED.
Dirty little brown bastard.
Nightshade[no u]
Massive Quasars
Posts: 8696
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Massive Quasars »

Nightshade wrote:Listen here, you filthy carpet-dwelling forehead slapper, JESUS CHRIST IS THE ONLY SCIENCE YOU NEED.
Dirty little brown bastard.
What was I thinking... :icon15:
Fender
Posts: 5876
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Fender »

Nightshade wrote:Listen here, you filthy carpet-dwelling forehead slapper, JESUS CHRIST IS THE ONLY SCIENCE YOU NEED.
Dirty little brown bastard.
*cough* already made that joke
Massive Quasars
Posts: 8696
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Massive Quasars »

werldhed wrote:I think we should announce that we actively research ways to prove that gays are scientifically incompatible for marriage. GWB would start throwing money at us.
rofl.

Seriously though, government perversion of science is unacceptable.
Nightshade
Posts: 17020
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Nightshade »

Fender wrote:
Nightshade wrote:Listen here, you filthy carpet-dwelling forehead slapper, JESUS CHRIST IS THE ONLY SCIENCE YOU NEED.
Dirty little brown bastard.
*cough* already made that joke
*COUGH* I MADE IT BETTER. AND FUNNY.
Fender
Posts: 5876
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Fender »

:rolleyes:
Maiden
Posts: 832
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Maiden »

while I think W is doing more than his fair share of putting pressure on those who's views don't match his agenda, you need to take this with a little bit of salt as well. if you had to guess how many scientists are republican, what would you say? I'd guess about .05%
Massive Quasars
Posts: 8696
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Massive Quasars »

Maiden, not all educated professionals are democrats. Some with libertarian leanings will vote republican consistently. Since Reagan though, the republican party is more about jesus freaks and imposing morality than smaller government and greater freedoms. They don't practice what they preach.
[url=http://www.marxists.org/][img]http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/3050/avatarmy7.gif[/img][img]http://img506.imageshack.us/img506/1736/leninzbp5.gif[/img][img]http://img506.imageshack.us/img506/1076/modulestalinat6.jpg[/img][img]http://img506.imageshack.us/img506/9239/cheds1.jpg[/img][/url]
Maiden
Posts: 832
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Maiden »

yeah, I know, I'm just saying those that are leading science tend to hang more to the left than my hard cock does. I have no doubt they are getting fucked by GW and his budget. I'm just wondering if it is as bad as its made out to be.
R00k
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2000 8:00 am

Post by R00k »

Maiden wrote:while I think W is doing more than his fair share of putting pressure on those who's views don't match his agenda, you need to take this with a little bit of salt as well. if you had to guess how many scientists are republican, what would you say? I'd guess about .05%
So you would take scientists who, in many cases, have devoted the better part of their life to research on understanding the natural laws of the universe, and throw out their opinions because you think they're doing it for a partisan agenda?

I'm not trolling you, that's a serious question.
R00k
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2000 8:00 am

Post by R00k »

Maiden wrote:yeah, I know, I'm just saying those that are leading science tend to hang more to the left than my hard cock does. I have no doubt they are getting fucked by GW and his budget. I'm just wondering if it is as bad as its made out to be.
Okay, I think I understand what you were saying now - I misunderstood you. You don't discount their opinions, you just think they may be exaggerating the problems a little bit because a republican administration is in office.

That's fair enough, and I'm positive it's true in some cases.

But you also have to consider things like werldhead posted above. I thought that was a pretty clear picture of what's going on, without any political slant to it.

I think scientists being forced to justify their research as somehow based on defense in order to get funding is pretty damn twisted, no matter how you slice it. Wouldn't you say?
Maiden
Posts: 832
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Maiden »

R00k wrote:
Maiden wrote:while I think W is doing more than his fair share of putting pressure on those who's views don't match his agenda, you need to take this with a little bit of salt as well. if you had to guess how many scientists are republican, what would you say? I'd guess about .05%
So you would take scientists who, in many cases, have devoted the better part of their life to research on understanding the natural laws of the universe, and throw out their opinions because you think they're doing it for a partisan agenda?

I'm not trolling you, that's a serious question.
gimmie a sec bro, I'm late as hell for work and need to get out of the house.
R00k
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2000 8:00 am

Post by R00k »

NP, you can ignore that post anyway. I misunderstood your post.
Hannibal
Posts: 1853
Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2000 8:00 am

Post by Hannibal »

The threat is more general (i.e., it is an assault on rationality and the employment of evidence as an argumentative tool). No one since Hitler has politicized science, rationality and argument more than this uncurious prick.
Post Reply