In particular, what do you want to ask them pertaining to science? For instance, the following questions have recently been proposed:
- What organization(s) or individual(s) is/are your primary source(s) for scientific information?
- With the overwhelming body of evidence for both evolution and climate change, why do you still not believe that both are true?
- Why do you oppose drug decriminalization when science and practical experience in Portugal support it?
- How can we use research, science and technology to help reduce the costs and improve the quality of health care?
These and many other questions have been proposed here, at ScienceDebate.org. You can go to that site and vote on the questoins or propose your own.
The Top Science Questions Facing America: 2012 Edition
What do YOU think are the top science questions the candidates for president should answer? We've posted the original 14 from 2008, preceded by their question numbers, and users have added others. Vote for those you feel are most important, add comments, or add your own! Check back often to vote on the new questions.
A suggestion: look at the questions we asked the candidates in 2008 and craft your question in a similar way. We're not interested in quizzing candidates on the 4th digit of pi or the particulars of cell mitosis. We want to know their positions on the big science and engineering policy questions that affect all our lives. The questions we will consider most successful will probe the candidates on the important issues of our day around science.
Some rules: Post questions, not statements. Categorize your question. Don't be redundant with existing questions. Don't spam the forum or use it to grind political axes. Be respectful. Use comments to discuss questions, not to answer them.
If you are a blogger, please put a pointer to this on your blog!
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Here's mine:
Health care costs are dominated by the last year of life. How can we encourage Americans to die with dignity?
--bks
I'd want to know what their epistemology is. When you tell us some fact, or claim that you know something, what sort foundation do you feel you need to have in order to make those claims? Is seeing it on the internet somewhere once enough? Is having a non-expert, or discredited expert validate the information enough? Is consultation with an expert enough? How much evidence do you need before you decide something is true? What do you consider evidence?
I want to know how these people come to understand the world, because the nonsense that is coming out of their mouths, the number of out right bald faced lies that Romney said in his speech Tuesday night, baffles me.
I second the comment of Besomyka. What is the basis of scientific claims or repudiations that each candidate uses or will use to form opinions, beliefs, or policy?
Presuming Mitt Romney receives the nomination, I would pose the following question to both him and President Obama:
Gentlemen, what would be your best guess of how many generations ago you had a relative, family member in common?