Thursday, October 07, 2004
"They speak as if they are entitled not only to their own opinions but also to their own facts.”
Hi ya! First of all, let's take care of some old business. The month of September was gigantic for the web site. We had about 500 visits, which is literally twice as large as the previous "personal best." Thanks for all the support! I realize that a lot of the visits are courtesy visits (I looked at your site) or pity visits ("I had better look at Carl's site..."), but a visit is a visit! : )
Now on to new business. The title quote was from Kurt Gottfried, chairman of the Union of Concerned Scientists (I lifted it from www.newscientist.com). There has been a lot of criticism from the scientific community that a) the politicians do not understand scientific issues at a gut level, and b) that by presenting their understanding of science as political platforms, that they are limiting the ability of scientists to do good.
I want to boil this down for you all, just so that you are aware of what is happening. Because of the way our economy works, there isn't a lot of "pure science" done any more. You get funded for research and products that address a public need; even if that need is frivolous. Think of two big medical issues; obesity and AIDS. There are huge clamors for "cures" for both. People want that magic pill to erase these two epidemics. However, in both cases, there are already preventive cures out there for 90% of the cases. Eat less, eat better, and exercise more. That "cures" obesity. But America continues to get fatter.
As for AIDS, the topic is a little tougher. Having better self-control in sexual choices, as well as using protection, would cripple this disease. While there is a need for pharmaceutics to fight this deadly disease, the real "spread" of the problem has to do with complacency and ignorance. The amount of AIDS being spread by, say, accidental blood contact is far lesser than the AIDS that is being spread because people make poor sexual decisions. A simple answer is out there to hamstring this epidemic, but yet AIDS is going nowhere.
Issues like these, and of a tougher nature create a public frenzy as it is, because the average citizen has only a small understanding of the facts. This frenzy is further driven by politicians who do not understand science, but yet stir the pot by rallying the public towards or against causes. Here are some key issues that we, as the public, need to become better informed on, or at least trust better sources that Kerry and Bush.
1) The Environment: Is there actually a real threat to the environment? How severe is it? Should we be relying on fossil fuels so heavily? How much of an impact can be made towards the positive by instituting recycling programs and enacting limitations of convenience packaging of disposable products?
2) Stem Cell Research: What are the facts? Are they encouraging abortions by supporting this research? Are there far greater chances for gain than there are risks for loss? What realistically can we hope to glean from such research? Is it fair to get the peoples' hopes up that this will lead to a cure for their diseases?
3) Cloning: What value would there be in cloning a human? What are the scientific arguments against it? Are we opposed to it because it is new, because it threatens our religious sensibility, because it is unethical, or because it seems needless and wasteful? Are we prepared to take a back seat to other countries who are not as resistant to such research?
4) Space Travel: Do we need to go the moon again? What value is there in placing man in space for long periods of time? Is NASA overindulged? Do we really need to land on Mars? How much exploration is hobby, and how much is beneficial science? What can we learn, and what do we hope to discover? Is it worth the costs that it will incur?
I am sorry today's blog wasn't humorous in any way, but these are some serious things to consider during an election year. It is easy for a Presidential candidate, who has nothing but total access to media air time, to stand and SAY anything. And sadly, a lot of people just soak up every word without giving it much thought. Even those of us who are a little more diligent in our listening can find ourselves assuming that the research has been done before the speech is made. This is a bad attitude to have. Get informed, and leave science to scientists.
See ya!
Now on to new business. The title quote was from Kurt Gottfried, chairman of the Union of Concerned Scientists (I lifted it from www.newscientist.com). There has been a lot of criticism from the scientific community that a) the politicians do not understand scientific issues at a gut level, and b) that by presenting their understanding of science as political platforms, that they are limiting the ability of scientists to do good.
I want to boil this down for you all, just so that you are aware of what is happening. Because of the way our economy works, there isn't a lot of "pure science" done any more. You get funded for research and products that address a public need; even if that need is frivolous. Think of two big medical issues; obesity and AIDS. There are huge clamors for "cures" for both. People want that magic pill to erase these two epidemics. However, in both cases, there are already preventive cures out there for 90% of the cases. Eat less, eat better, and exercise more. That "cures" obesity. But America continues to get fatter.
As for AIDS, the topic is a little tougher. Having better self-control in sexual choices, as well as using protection, would cripple this disease. While there is a need for pharmaceutics to fight this deadly disease, the real "spread" of the problem has to do with complacency and ignorance. The amount of AIDS being spread by, say, accidental blood contact is far lesser than the AIDS that is being spread because people make poor sexual decisions. A simple answer is out there to hamstring this epidemic, but yet AIDS is going nowhere.
Issues like these, and of a tougher nature create a public frenzy as it is, because the average citizen has only a small understanding of the facts. This frenzy is further driven by politicians who do not understand science, but yet stir the pot by rallying the public towards or against causes. Here are some key issues that we, as the public, need to become better informed on, or at least trust better sources that Kerry and Bush.
1) The Environment: Is there actually a real threat to the environment? How severe is it? Should we be relying on fossil fuels so heavily? How much of an impact can be made towards the positive by instituting recycling programs and enacting limitations of convenience packaging of disposable products?
2) Stem Cell Research: What are the facts? Are they encouraging abortions by supporting this research? Are there far greater chances for gain than there are risks for loss? What realistically can we hope to glean from such research? Is it fair to get the peoples' hopes up that this will lead to a cure for their diseases?
3) Cloning: What value would there be in cloning a human? What are the scientific arguments against it? Are we opposed to it because it is new, because it threatens our religious sensibility, because it is unethical, or because it seems needless and wasteful? Are we prepared to take a back seat to other countries who are not as resistant to such research?
4) Space Travel: Do we need to go the moon again? What value is there in placing man in space for long periods of time? Is NASA overindulged? Do we really need to land on Mars? How much exploration is hobby, and how much is beneficial science? What can we learn, and what do we hope to discover? Is it worth the costs that it will incur?
I am sorry today's blog wasn't humorous in any way, but these are some serious things to consider during an election year. It is easy for a Presidential candidate, who has nothing but total access to media air time, to stand and SAY anything. And sadly, a lot of people just soak up every word without giving it much thought. Even those of us who are a little more diligent in our listening can find ourselves assuming that the research has been done before the speech is made. This is a bad attitude to have. Get informed, and leave science to scientists.
See ya!
Comments:
Post a Comment