|
Reader's Favorites
Media Casualties Mount Administration Split On Europe Invasion Administration In Crisis Over Burgeoning Quagmire Congress Concerned About Diversion From War On Japan Pot, Kettle On Line Two... Allies Seize Paris The Natural Gore Book Sales Tank, Supporters Claim Unfair Tactics Satan Files Lack Of Defamation Suit Why This Blog Bores People With Space Stuff A New Beginning My Hit Parade
Instapundit (Glenn Reynolds) Tim Blair James Lileks Bleats Virginia Postrel Kausfiles Winds Of Change (Joe Katzman) Little Green Footballs (Charles Johnson) Samizdata Eject Eject Eject (Bill Whittle) Space Alan Boyle (MSNBC) Space Politics (Jeff Foust) Space Transport News (Clark Lindsey) NASA Watch NASA Space Flight Hobby Space A Voyage To Arcturus (Jay Manifold) Dispatches From The Final Frontier (Michael Belfiore) Personal Spaceflight (Jeff Foust) Mars Blog The Flame Trench (Florida Today) Space Cynic Rocket Forge (Michael Mealing) COTS Watch (Michael Mealing) Curmudgeon's Corner (Mark Whittington) Selenian Boondocks Tales of the Heliosphere Out Of The Cradle Space For Commerce (Brian Dunbar) True Anomaly Kevin Parkin The Speculist (Phil Bowermaster) Spacecraft (Chris Hall) Space Pragmatism (Dan Schrimpsher) Eternal Golden Braid (Fred Kiesche) Carried Away (Dan Schmelzer) Laughing Wolf (C. Blake Powers) Chair Force Engineer (Air Force Procurement) Spacearium Saturn Follies JesusPhreaks (Scott Bell) Science
Nanobot (Howard Lovy) Lagniappe (Derek Lowe) Geek Press (Paul Hsieh) Gene Expression Carl Zimmer Redwood Dragon (Dave Trowbridge) Charles Murtaugh Turned Up To Eleven (Paul Orwin) Cowlix (Wes Cowley) Quark Soup (Dave Appell) Economics/Finance
Assymetrical Information (Jane Galt and Mindles H. Dreck) Marginal Revolution (Tyler Cowen et al) Man Without Qualities (Robert Musil) Knowledge Problem (Lynne Kiesling) Journoblogs The Ombudsgod Cut On The Bias (Susanna Cornett) Joanne Jacobs The Funny Pages
Cox & Forkum Day By Day Iowahawk Happy Fun Pundit Jim Treacher IMAO The Onion Amish Tech Support (Lawrence Simon) Scrapple Face (Scott Ott) Regular Reading
Quasipundit (Adragna & Vehrs) England's Sword (Iain Murray) Daily Pundit (Bill Quick) Pejman Pundit Daimnation! (Damian Penny) Aspara Girl Flit Z+ Blog (Andrew Zolli) Matt Welch Ken Layne The Kolkata Libertarian Midwest Conservative Journal Protein Wisdom (Jeff Goldstein et al) Dean's World (Dean Esmay) Yippee-Ki-Yay (Kevin McGehee) Vodka Pundit Richard Bennett Spleenville (Andrea Harris) Random Jottings (John Weidner) Natalie Solent On the Third Hand (Kathy Kinsley, Bellicose Woman) Patrick Ruffini Inappropriate Response (Moira Breen) Jerry Pournelle Other Worthy Weblogs
Ain't No Bad Dude (Brian Linse) Airstrip One A libertarian reads the papers Andrew Olmsted Anna Franco Review Ben Kepple's Daily Rant Bjorn Staerk Bitter Girl Catallaxy Files Dawson.com Dodgeblog Dropscan (Shiloh Bucher) End the War on Freedom Fevered Rants Fredrik Norman Heretical Ideas Ideas etc Insolvent Republic of Blogistan James Reuben Haney Libertarian Rant Matthew Edgar Mind over what matters Muslimpundit Page Fault Interrupt Photodude Privacy Digest Quare Rantburg Recovering Liberal Sand In The Gears(Anthony Woodlief) Sgt. Stryker The Blogs of War The Fly Bottle The Illuminated Donkey Unqualified Offerings What she really thinks Where HipHop & Libertarianism Meet Zem : blog Space Policy Links
Space Future The Space Review The Space Show Space Frontier Foundation Space Policy Digest BBS AWOL
USS Clueless (Steven Den Beste) Media Minder Unremitting Verse (Will Warren) World View (Brink Lindsay) The Last Page More Than Zero (Andrew Hofer) Pathetic Earthlings (Andrew Lloyd) Spaceship Summer (Derek Lyons) The New Space Age (Rob Wilson) Rocketman (Mark Oakley) Mazoo Site designed by Powered by Movable Type |
The Left's War On Science Chris Mooney wrote a book called "The Republican War On Science." While it was obviously (from its title) of partisan intent, it was well researched, and did make a good case for it. And it even purported to attempt to appear bi-partisan, by pointing out a few examples of political attacks on science from the left. However, it gave them extremely short shrift, in my opinion. Here's just one example of the kind of thing with which he could have balanced the book, had he truly wanted to. My problem with Chris' book is that it was too polemical, when he had an opportunity to make a serious point--that science is continually under assault by people with an agenda from all points on the political compass. By attempting to make it a partisan issue, it results in a misdiagnosis of the problem. After all, if it's only a "Republican" war on science, then the solution is simple--elect Democrats. Unfortunately, the problem is much more complex than that, and the notion that it's not holds us back from finding a real solution. Posted by Rand Simberg at August 21, 2007 06:36 AMTrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.transterrestrial.com/mt-diagnostics.cgi/8053 Listed below are links to weblogs that reference this post from Transterrestrial Musings.
Comments
Excellent point, Rand. The Bush administration's stance on science has been less than stellar. I think one of the things driving Mooney and those who argue the same point is that the Republican "war" is motivated by religious means. I'm sure they would qualify the post-modernist, leftist assaults on some areas of research as not being as severe. In my view, putting a limit on research in the name of religion is just as bad as putting limits in the name of "protecting the oppressed." Unfortunately, Phil Plaitt, with his normally excellent Bad Astronomy site, has turned it into another anti-Bush diatribe. He cites Mooney often. Posted by Bob at August 21, 2007 07:47 AMAnother thing about the argument that Republicans are marching on science: it's often deployed in the effort to make all disagreements over someone's favored policy implication of a particular finding into a denegration of science itself. See famous non-Republican Al Gore's "The Assault on Reason" for instance. Posted by Chuck at August 21, 2007 08:02 AMI lost a dollar in a vending machine this morning...naturally, it's the Republicans' fault. Yes, supporting free-market capitalism and lower taxes leads to an aversion of all things scientific. Similarly, supporting abortion on demand and race/gender-based preferences leads to the path of pure scientific enlightenment...yep, pure scientific enlightenment and cannibalism. Posted by Gunga at August 21, 2007 08:29 AMIf you let the government control, direct, or influence anything, then by definition, you will disagree with what they are doing about half of the time. If you're lucky. Posted by Donut at August 21, 2007 08:51 AM I think it's a general attack by a group at a subject that's personally threatening,or at least threatens to expose unfavorable thoughts.I've been known to remark,the Democrats are as frightened(at least) by discussions of ethnicity and IQ (which doesn'r actually exist) as the Republicans are about evolution.Actually,probably more,since the evolution debate is over and the IQ studies are a constant spin off of affirmative action Glad to hear someone else is a little bored with Phil's new posts. His (non-political) science stuff is still good, though. Good post, Rand. Any position (scientific, religious, political) will have detractors. I think the big adjustment we're going through now has to do with the internet and other media sources allow a much faster, louder response from detractors. Posted by Tom at August 21, 2007 10:11 AMPhil Plait's 'Bad Astronomy' was a must read excellent site for me. No longer. He's got full blown BDS. I once posted a polite counter view to his political polemics suggesting the site stick to science and was instantly banned from posting at the site, the only time it's ever happened to me. Posted by philw at August 21, 2007 11:51 AMRand, you're missing the point. Democrats aren't attacking science--they're attacking vicious lying PROPAGANDA that purports to be "science". (Or at least that's how they view the situation.) Posted by DensityDuck at August 21, 2007 11:55 AMAnother few years of cooling and the Dems are going to have a lot of 'splainin to do. The Minority Report on Climate Science. Note the US Gov. url. Posted by M. Simon at August 21, 2007 12:09 PMRand, you're missing the point. Democrats aren't attacking science--they're attacking vicious lying PROPAGANDA that purports to be "science". (Or at least that's how they view the situation.) Of course that's how they see the situation. But really, is their disagreement based on science or is it based on facts that they simply disagree with. Is it "vicious lying PROPAGANDA" whenever anyone disagrees with human-caused global warming? Is that why they automatically try to demonize and discredit those who disagree with their opinions? In that regard, their tactics are similar to how the old Soviet Union used to put dissidents into mental institutions. After all, anyone who disagreed with the "workers paradise" had to be crazy. Today, anyone who disagrees with AGW has to be a lair, a fraud, and/or on the take from the oil companies. Posted by Larry J at August 21, 2007 01:02 PMThe problem leftists have is that they're never challenged. They go through school, university, all their professors are leftists and they never hear contrary views presented intelligently and sympathetically. It's all one-sided. They can't see anything but their own points of view because that's all they've ever known. Posted by Muncy at August 21, 2007 02:19 PMThe Bush administration's stance on science has been less than stellar. Apart from refusing to apply federal funds to embryonic stem cell research, how so? I would even contend that said decision to deny funding is fiscally wise -- other, far-more-promising avenues of stem cell research are being funded very generously by private industry. Just why should the federal government pour our money into something the private sector finds uninteresting as an investment because it offers so little promise of success compared to numerous other ways to arrive at the same result? As a scientist myself (first two degrees in geology, then soil chemistry) I believe the current administration's approach to science funding hasn't really been all that bad. I'm far more concerned by the pressures of political correctness in research, for example climate. There's a lot of important research to do in paleo-climate (a topic I understand fairly well) but nobody's even asking for money to do it because they don't like the implications (for their careers) of what it might show. Similarly, it's acceptable for research to show differences between men and women, but only if the difference favors women. Thus it can be reported that males constitute a much higher percentage of the profoundly retarded -- Y chromosome and all that -- but look what happened to the former president of Harvard when he observed that the same effect probably prevailed at the genius end of the distribution as well. Posted by Bart Hall (Kansas, USA) at August 21, 2007 03:44 PMPost a comment |