(Virtual) Sciencedebate 2008

i-c0bada39a613282cc9e782a43ebee985-SD08INNOV08Bnr.jpg

Today, Sciencedebate 2008 got as close as it's likely to come to its original goals: John McCain released his answers to the "14 top science questions facing America." Barack Obama released his two weeks ago, so you can now compare the candidates' positions on those 14 science questions side-by-side.

It seems that everyone has an opinion on whether the original goal of a televised debate on science themes (which the National Academies volunteered to host) was a good idea or not. Everyone will also have an opinion on whether these questions are the best ones - and how the vice-presidents' answers would differ. But we should be able to agree that what we have now is a good thing: more information. Kudos to Sciblings Sheril and Chris for making this happen!

More like this

"As a Navy..."

"As I of Arizona..."

"As head of committee..."

STFU McCain! Your jowly lying face isn't fooling any one! Sometimes you just wish some brave reporter would stuff his jowls down his throat just to shut him up...sniveling lie after sniveling whine...

All in all, McCain's plans: vague, overly simplistic, and impractical.

Obama's plans: starting at the grassroots with teachers as well as doubling research funding!

I'm relieved to read that John McCain states he is 'uniquely qualified to lead our nation during this technological revolution' by virtue of his use of radar and short-wave radios, not to mention how surprised I was to find out that under his guiding hand, mobile phones and Wi-Fi became available. Thankfully he didn't say he invented them.

Beyond his cheeky political hyperbole though, Senator McCain's answers betray a fundamental misunderstanding of the government's role in science and technology. His view starts primarily at the point of commercialization, with very little time, effort or apparent thought given to the many years of work that goes into research prior to that step. It is exactly at these early stages where government funding is most efficiently deployed. These early years require sustained support, without which, we would have very little to commercialize. It is this support that has been horribly lacking through the latter part of the Bush administration and McCain's answers indicate a dangerous continuation of that policy. The Bush administration's decisions over the last 5 years to overlook this type of research has done much to restrict the science and technology pipeline of its greatest assets---its junior members and data that will, with the help of entrepreneurs and industry, go into commercial products. This policy must be changed if we are to move forward and regain our momentum.

Moreover, McCain's suggestion that significant savings can be found by imposing greater 'fiscal responsibility by improving the scientific and engineering management within the federal government' is simply mystifying. Our federal science and technology funding agencies and research centers are some of the most efficient and transparent in the world and it is very disingenuous for the candidate to suggest our problems emanate from any direction other than from his own policy source: the Bush administration.

Lastly, and perhaps least important, is that Senator McCain appears slightly out of date---biotechnology is not precisely a 'new and emerging' field. It contributes and has contributed for some time to significant economic activity. It can, however, be mismanaged like any other sector of the economy. We need a president that respects science and understands how it contributes to our countries prosperity and well being.

By genejockey (not verified) on 15 Sep 2008 #permalink

Sigh. Politicians are like insurance agents - they promised everything and most often deliver nothing. Wouldn't it be refreshing if one of them said honestly, "This is where I think we should go, but damned if I know how to get there."

If we could have had just one live debate on the issue, as opposed to the umpteen "faith debates" we had, perhaps we could have had a chance to see who is more able to develop a plan for the country based on objective principles.

I'm glad that McCain responded, but, really, does anybody think that he actually wrote this? My bet is that one or more) of the lobbyists working on his campaign wrote these responses.

Written responses are like depositions where only one attorney is present; meaningless in the context of discovery.