Because the truth is that promoting science isn't just about providing resources--it's about protecting free and open inquiry. It's about ensuring that facts and evidence are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology. It's about listening to what our scientists have to say, even when it's inconvenient--especially when it's inconvenient. Because the highest purpose of science is the search for knowledge, truth and a greater understanding of the world around us. That will be my goal as President of the United States--and I could not have a better team to guide me in this work.
Read the entire text.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
My colleague Susan F. Wood had an excellent op-ed in the Washington Post over the weekend about the Obama administration's overruling of the scientifically grounded FDA decision to approve emergency contraceptive Plan B for over-the-counter sale without age restrictions. She begins by going back in…
Luckily they don't make the mistake of actually debating denialists. The feature of last weeks issue, "Age of Denial" is a series of articles by skeptics and one laughable rebuttal, discussing the nature of denialism and tactics to use against it. They do quite a good job covering the basics,…
From Revkin I see yet another attempt to misunderstand the problem of communicating science vs anti-science.
The author, Dan Kahan, summarizes his explanation for the science communication problem, as well as 4 other "not so good" explanations in this slide:
He then describes "Identity-protective…
Chris Mooney has been exploring the basic underpinnings of denialism lately, with this latest article a good summary of the basic problems:
In a recent study of climate blog readers, Lewandowksy and his colleagues found that the strongest predictor of being a climate change denier is having a…
I could wish he hadn't equated science with truth -- resistance to the idea that there is no One True anything is one of the worst barriers to public understanding of science. But that's quibbling, and I'm with you, this is very good news.
Free, open, and honest inquiry.
And technically Bill, he didn't equate Science with Truth Itself; he equated it with the Search For Truth... which is a nuance that admittedly is as likely to escape the Frothing Right as it apparently escaped you. Science is (at heart) a methodology for judging which of a group of suggestions is likely to be closest to the Truth about the Evidence. The "truths" students learn in science class like "conservation of mass-energy" or "cause-and-effect" (although that's less solid) are only "the best candidates put forward so far", and you're correct that the failure to grasp the difference between that and "Truth" is a major problem. (The other side of the coin being that those who grasp that Science doesn't have the "Truth" fail to understand that doesn't preclude it definitely having "the best candidates put forward so far".)
But yes, I'm relatively happy with this news. Admittedly, there's some griping (such as from PZ) about Ken Salazar being Interior Secretary, but it's unlikely he'll make the environmental handbasket head Hellward even faster than Kempthorne has. Overall, things are looking promising.
Of course, we're still awaiting the Inauguration....