What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
135 Comments
- theNazz, on 02/16/2008, -7/+72Who gave George Bush the power to excuse himself and his administration from every national and international law?
- Barbosa, on 02/16/2008, -10/+72The Republican War on Science by Chris Mooney is a book that I read last year about this very subject. The book was written over a year ago, but still well worth a read. This article kind of picks up where the book left off, detailing some of the consequences of the politicization of science that occurred in recent years.
- rhedhead, on 02/16/2008, -5/+62The Bush administration has done nothing to abate or address this problem,,, "When science is falsified, fabricated or censored Americans' health and safety suffer," .. Period.
- JBmtk, on 02/16/2008, -5/+38Why are people defending Bush? I don't think he ever defended any of you.
- Dysarthria, on 02/16/2008, -3/+31Politicization of science is nothing new; just hop in your time machine and ask Galileo. What disturbs me as much as accusation of the Bushies censoring scientists is scientists themselves censoring others with valid data or a different POV.
- zplot, on 02/16/2008, -6/+34I guess Bush got confused about separation of Church and State, and instead pursued the separation of Science and State. Objectivity, evidence and rational thought must now be kept out of all decision-making processes.
- DiggLive, on 02/16/2008, -4/+29Excuse me? Obama and Kucinich were also anti-war.
- chubbymidget, on 02/16/2008, -3/+25The White House would never do such a thing.
Edit: This comment edited by White House 17:33 - krnldmp, on 02/16/2008, -0/+21Complacent Americans, and don't you forget it.
- rnwen2750, on 02/16/2008, -10/+30Yes, we can all tell you've done a wonderful job on your homework.
- ricky125, on 02/16/2008, -10/+30Cashman57, are you ***** retarded?
- eir574, on 02/16/2008, -6/+22Why doesn't cashman57 offer some proof himself? He made a statement (maybe even an accusation), and didn't substantiate it.
- sotopheavy, on 02/16/2008, -2/+18God did, or at least that is what Bush thinks.
- brstilson, on 02/16/2008, -6/+22The burden of proof is on cashman since he is refuting a study that is substantiated by data.
- jwrichards, on 02/16/2008, -0/+15This isn't exactly news to anybody who has payed any attention to this administration's attitudes toward science. People at every major agency have been pushed aside, minimized, or silenced whenever their research hasn't agreed with the pre-defined objectives of the administration.
- SilverBlade2k, on 02/16/2008, -2/+16Bush suppressed "scientific evidence" about a lot of things (global warming, aspartame..a lot of others) for one pure and simple reason: Corporate payoffs.
As we know, Bush is an oil man..so why would he allow research to come out saying that burning fossil fuels contributes to it? If anything, he would re-phrase that to say that it doesn't, so that he can keep collecting his paychecks. - thebellmaster1x, on 02/16/2008, -3/+17Whether you think something constitutes "junk science" is irrelevant. It is not, nor will it ever be, up to the President to decide whether something is junk science. That is the job of ACTUAL SCIENTISTS.
- pdotnet, on 02/16/2008, -1/+15I'm nominating Bush for cracked.com's 'Douchebag of the Decade' award
- exomni, on 02/16/2008, -0/+13The lack of support -- and in many cases even opposition to the scientific community, is probably the #1 reason I will never support the Republican party.
- inactive, on 02/16/2008, -4/+17So, why not also IMPEACH Bush and recover the knowledge his administration has laid to waste.
- CheeseburgerBro, on 02/16/2008, -5/+18Trolling Digg is like shooting fish in a barrel.
Why don't you aim your ambitions a little higher, cashman57? - inactive, on 02/16/2008, -1/+13If you prevent research to progress to it's fullest extent because it won't match your beliefs, that is censorship. Marijuana reseach can only be done with government grown weed. The problem researchers found is the samples are dirt weed and useless for studies. So what does the govenment say, "Marijuana has no medical perpose.". But if a university supplies there own weed and finds a medical purpose, the Fed finds the research to be invalid and the university faces criminal charges. This happen at the University of Pennsylvania.
- MasterThief117, on 02/16/2008, -4/+15This is completely obvious. Any information that underestimates what the government thinks is going to end up being censored. It is completely terrible. A lot of the censored information is very useful information. Some could possibly save lives. Others could make lives more comfortable for those who are suffering from certain illnesses. An example would be marijuana. A lot of the research that has proven this medicine to be good has been censored, while the government pumps it's own propaganda out about it.
- inactive, on 02/17/2008, -0/+11There's no war on Christmas. Stop listening to FOX.
- asspants, on 02/16/2008, -2/+12Let me make this clear: I'm a paul supporter.
Obama was not in the senate the first time the patroit act was brought up, so he didnt vote on it. He supported extending the patroit act.
Obama has made it clear that his intentions are to get out of there as safely and quickly as possible.
That's the same thing Dr Paul wants to do, dude.
It's not like if paul was inaugurated tomorrow we would be out there by Monday, or anything. - inactive, on 02/16/2008, -6/+16you are part of the problem, not the solution.
please check your political beliefs at the door. - girlpirate, on 02/16/2008, -1/+10buried because that owl ALWAYS takes up way too much damn space.
- eir574, on 02/16/2008, -1/+10Wow, I feel like I might have read this comment on another thread! I even vaguely recall telling the person who posted it that it was the media that hyped up the global cooling thing. You know, I wish it were as easy as people suggest to invent a crisis and get research money. Many brilliant scientists I've worked with would be much better off if that were true.
- offspring06, on 02/16/2008, -1/+10Didn't Bush give himself that power?
- Radical5, on 02/16/2008, -0/+8There's a difference between stealing data and manipulating our way of life you stupid *****
- inactive, on 02/17/2008, -0/+8You guys never do your research. The global cooling scare of the 70's were studies showing the effect of sulphate aerosol and cfc's on the atmosphere. Aerosols reflect sunlight back into space causing it to cool, but also destroys the ozone layer. When sulphate aerosol and cfc productions were brought down it took 15 years for the ozone to start making a comeback. But since then we have increased our output and use of hydrocarbons and other fossil fuels causing greenhouse gases that increase and accelerate the earth's natural heating cycle.
Someday you will need to learn and stand on your own and not obey and kneel to your Master's wishes. - reignbow, on 02/16/2008, -1/+9Wow, that's excellent. Your quoted authorities:
* Ehrlich, a specialist for cancer treatment, on the subject of macroeconomics
* Ponte, whose academic qualifications I couldn't even *determine* on "cooling", which is not further defined
* somebody reporting on Ponte 30 years ago - which btw seems to have been on Limbaugh recently (coincidence?)
Note that Newsweek is not actually considered a scientific authority. When results are independently reproduced and find acclaim in a community numbering thousands of scientists from many backgrounds, institutes and countries, THAT's scientific mainstream. - rblinne, on 02/16/2008, -1/+8http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/2008/0214scienti ...
AAAS Honors Climate Scientist James Hansen with Scientific Freedom and Responsibility Award
James Hansen, a government scientist who has spoken forcefully about human influence on global climate despite pressure to alter his message, is the recipient of the 2007 AAAS Award for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility.
Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City, has become a familiar and determined voice in the ongoing national conversation about climate change. The AAAS award citation credits Hansen for "his outspoken advocacy on behalf of scientists' responsibilities to communicate openly and honestly with the public on matters of importance to their health and welfare."
Hansen is a pioneer in the use of computer models that have helped document a discernible human influence on global climate due to the production of heat-trapping greenhouse gases. There has been one degree Fahrenheit of global warming during the past 30 years, Hansen says, and another one degree Fahrenheit in the pipeline due to greenhouse gases already released into the atmosphere. There remains a large gap in what is known by scientists about global warming, he argues, and what the public and policy makers need to know about it.
In a memo supporting Hansen's selection, the award committee wrote that he "has faced pressure, and sometimes outright opposition, from highly placed individuals in the past four administrations" who have urged him to alter his message in one direction or another. The memo adds, "in consistently fighting to keep his scientific opinions free from political influence and revision, Dr. Hansen has drawn attention to the broader issue of political interference in scientific communication, a process that he warns is 'in direct opposition to the most fundamental precepts of science.' "
One of the fundamental precepts of democracy, Hansen says, is that the public should be honestly informed about research findings and their implications for public policy. In a talk last year before the National Press Club, Hansen said, "I don't think the framers of the Constitution expected that when a government employee -- a technical government employee -- reports to Congress, his testimony would have to be approved and edited by the White House first." That has been the case under both Republican and Democratic administrations, he said, although "the problems are worse now than I've seen in my thirty years in government."
In January 2006, Hansen told The New York Times that the Administration had tried to muzzle him after he called for prompt reductions in the emissions of greenhouse gases during a talk at a scientific meeting. He also released data showing that 2005 was probably the warmest year in at least a century. Hansen said that he was warned there would be "dire consequences" if such statements continued. A NASA public affairs officer rejected a request by National Public Radio to interview Hansen. But he continued to speak out, and NASA Administrator Michael Griffin issued an agency-wide statement clarifying that the role of public affairs officers was not "to alter, filter or adjust engineering or scientific materials produced by NASA's technical staff."
The Scientific Freedom and Responsibility Award is presented annually by AAAS to honor individual scientists and engineers or organizations for exemplary actions that help foster scientific freedom and responsibility. The award recognizes outstanding efforts to protect the public's health, safety or welfare; to focus public attention on the potential impacts of science and technology; to establish new precedents in carrying out social responsibilities; or to defend the professional freedom of scientists and engineers.
The award was established in 1980 and is approved by the AAAS Board of Directors. The recipient will receive a $5,000 prize. The award will be presented along with other AAAS Awards on Saturday, 16 February at the 2008 AAAS Annual Meeting in Boston. - offspring06, on 02/16/2008, -2/+9Junk science > junk religion
- krnldmp, on 02/16/2008, -0/+7Bush can only get away with what the citizenry doesn't even know its tolerating. Its a complicated and well developed problem.
Check this video: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02152008/watch2. ... - jwrichards, on 02/16/2008, -0/+7You are aware that Scragged is probably satire, right? Any website that has announced victory in the war on Poverty is more about the funnies than actually supporting your argument.
- rossmills, on 02/16/2008, -1/+7It makes sense to me, but the whole "Well what came before?" is what I consider interesting for a number of reasons.
- artanis, on 02/16/2008, -2/+8Sources please?
- lordshank, on 02/16/2008, -2/+7Even if it is a scam to get grants, is that wrong? Maybe it might seem silly to the ruling minority and their red state minions, but I'd rather see more multimillion dollar research centers/projects than I would ballparks, SUV's, and surveillance programs. Maybe the best solution is to let "god" take care of cancer research or space exploration. Remember, the next time you are at a grocery store, or a gas station, or the ***** mall, science made all this ***** possible.
- rblinne, on 02/16/2008, -0/+5The last part of the URL should be scientific_freedom.shtml. Why is Digg chopping URLs?
- scslmd, on 02/16/2008, -5/+10All of you who argue about the validity of 'Claim A' or 'Claim B' is completely missing the point. Any scientist can claim any theory they want as long as they publish their findings so the findings are ***PEER REVIEWED AND VALIDATED***. What the scientists are saying is the current administration is "surely the worst" and "directly involved in the suppression and falsification of science" to justify their political agenda. It's one thing to publish a theory based on your data collected, it's another to completely falsify data just to fit your conclusions.
- inactive, on 02/17/2008, -0/+5"... computer model that only shows global warming if all data from volcanic activity is deleted."
If you remove volcanic activity data then you should be slowing GW. Volcanic activity would add to GW. - Radical5, on 02/16/2008, -3/+8But at least they're making trillions of dollars in the process.
...and it's not like we still have poverty and homeless people anymore guys, c'mon you don't have to worry about these kinds of things it doesn't concern you. It's they're fault they were born poor, we can't do anything to help them.
(sarcasm for those who were retarded enough to take this seriously, and I only say this because I know some of you did) - rnwen2750, on 02/16/2008, -2/+6I thought he said this wasn't a war...
- Nougat, on 02/16/2008, -4/+8There it is - you're a Ron Paul supporter.
I hate to break it to you, but it seems the rumor is true. Paul is dead. - inactive, on 02/17/2008, -0/+4"Silent Spring" was about the dangers of DDT, now well known and documented and, thankfully, DDT is now tightly controlled.
- Dysarthria, on 02/17/2008, -1/+5Not a denier, just not a "believer", because science isn't about belief.
I'm open to any scientific theory which can be tested. Are you? - EarlOfLade, on 02/17/2008, -1/+4The American people and not only those who voted for him since the criminals are still in the White House, so stop complaining about him and DO SOMETHING!
- ShnowDoggie, on 02/17/2008, -1/+4You are a fool, plain and simple.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 140 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is