Science debate moves on

steve smyth — Fri, 16 May 2008 18:35:13 GMT

maybe...since the incoming candidates are avoiding this issue like the plague...we can get the outgoing Bubbya to finally tell us his Science Policy...since the future will depend upon it...much more than anything the incoming crew's gonna muster...remember, the Bush's are the most successful American Oilmen ever.
let's figger what is...then we can better deal with what's coming, don'tcha think?

Science debate moves on

S.B. Stein E.B. NJ — Fri, 16 May 2008 18:35:36 GMT

What we need are leaders (political, pop icons and sports stars and legends to name a few) to show that they are into science and how it effects their lives and ours. It is ashame that we have a president who is so poorly versed in science and seemingly has little contact with the scientific community. I hope the next president and the next session of Congress put more money forth for research and science education.

It would be nice if the actress Danica McKellar would do a spot for science and math education. She is a part of a group that published a paper on something math related. I heard it on Science Friday a while back. She could be a good example of math being for everybody.

Science debate moves on

Steven Albee-Scott, Logan, UT — Fri, 16 May 2008 19:28:59 GMT

Let's see...we pay for drugs that we have already paid for through publicly funded research. We have few choices for alternative energy sources, and now that we have worked ourselves into a corner, we complain about high energy prices. We have economic policies guided by fuzzy math for corporate bigots to make more money. Debate? Why have a debate? We're fine. Oh and evolution is the work of the devil...and isn't evolution science? Science must be against god. Very logical.

Science debate moves on

J. Quinlan — Fri, 16 May 2008 21:40:53 GMT

I think that historically, the only thing that the candidates will focus on, at this point, is their need to grab the coveted position of President of the United States and the power rush that goes with it. We will hear all kinds of promises of course from the candidates. The push for science's needs will have to come after the election. That is when we had better be more than prepared to present and substantiate the needs ( That shouldn't be hard ). It is Science that will help to guide us out of some of our most chronic problems at this point in our history. It needs strong support from the public and government and I think that the public is ready for some help at this point.

Science debate moves on

Dan Asti, NYC, NY — Fri, 16 May 2008 21:43:22 GMT

Unfortunately, the media is more concerned with what a pastor says and interpreting the intent of his words than real issues that are important to people's lives.

The media drives the news and the people's interest follows these days. Unfortunately that's backwards to how it should be. Blame your editors and owners for pushing their own agendas. Don't blame the candidates for responding to the issues you push onto people.

If the media reported more truth then we would be having science debates.

Science debate moves on

Ed S., Austin, TX — Fri, 16 May 2008 22:10:53 GMT

After the current administration's behavior in filtering scientific input through political filters for political purposes, I hope we do get an opportunity to assess candidates attitudes toward and grasp of science. I would weigh this factor more heavily than most as I do not believe in supernatural beings that affect our futures.

Science debate moves on

B.S. — Sat, 17 May 2008 01:27:53 GMT

the exploration of space is mostly put into second fiddle, a main arguement with this is usually associated with we have not even explored our oceon's, this is a invalid excuse. reason being, ocean depth & deep space are both forms of nature and should both be explored & problems encountered as encountered, until planetary scientists & space sientists can conjoin & help one another the others progress will be slow at best, join forces with science, expand education, expand spending, & put the money from war into this, and tou will see a dramatic change, good luck humanity!

Science debate moves on

J. Quinlan — Sat, 17 May 2008 02:13:53 GMT

S.B. Stein puts forth a great idea. Science needs to sell itself as much, if not more, than any other product or political aspiration. Science isn't in the business of advertising and marketing but they had better get up to speed and push their ideas through celebrity endorsements. I think it's a great idea.

Science debate moves on

Hunter, Jax Fl — Sat, 17 May 2008 03:22:12 GMT

While the need for a scientific debate seems like a good idea, I think most people are delusional as to why. It isn't to find the level of scientific competency and willingness of a candidate to fund it. It is a security blanket for the first few generations after the neo-cons to feel like a more logical approach to life and space is on the horizon. Sure we want people on Mars so we can check it out and say we did it, but the bigger question is what's out there and where do we fit in. Unfortunately, there are still too many people of voting age that think the story book we call the Bible is true. Until these people no longer matter, I don't think you will find any Candidates who are going to willingly and honestly open up Pandora's scientific box. When people are openly debating science, it will ultimately turn to spirituality and religious beliefs and no one in the position of Presidential Candidate would be dumb enough to alienate the pathetic majority of this country by saying what they really feel. You want to debate science? Better start revoking voting cards. That or wait a few more Presidents. Just my thoughts.

Science debate moves on

jane VanPell, Sevierville, Tn — Sat, 17 May 2008 04:47:29 GMT

I could not have said it better than Dan Asti,of NYC.
It is the media and a relatively small number of commentators that drives the news and tells us what we should, or need to be concerned about. They actually create issues to fill up air time. Why do they not discuss climate,cutting edge medical information, population control, the US's declining standard of living, etc. The media must judge their audiences by their own ignorance and disinterest of anything of a scientfic nature. As an afterthought: How many people think or care the political infighting between the two democratic candidates is really tearing the party apart?
Jane V

Science debate moves on

Des Emery, St. Thomas, ON, Canada — Sat, 17 May 2008 05:09:01 GMT

McCain can talk easily about 'war service.' Hillary 'knows' all about being a 'woman' in a man's world. Obama can certainly describe 'color-based' discrimination and/or acceptance depending on his location.

But could any of them talk sensibly for more than ten minutes about the Hadron Collider, galactic formation, lunar-based solar power, or the various benefits derived from the International Space Station?

A science debate would only reveal their shortcomings. Beyond saying "I'm fer it" or "I'm agin it" could any of them do better than any of us who follow Cosmic Log religiously?

Perhaps you, Alan, should consider running...

Science debate moves on

Des Emery, St. Thomas, ON, Canada — Sat, 17 May 2008 05:10:59 GMT

P.S. -- I'd vote for you, Alan. If I had a vote. Ah, well...

Science debate moves on

Bob Massey, Littleton Colorado — Sat, 17 May 2008 07:42:06 GMT

Religion versus Science!
The masses were indoctrinated under childish faith in elders to love the supernatural to love to death an "I'm a jealous God" - Moses Exodus. To base the ultimate UNDERSTANDING of LIFE on a non-understandable being - Jesus: "only the Father understands me and only I understand the Father".
To BELIEVE we must start natural understanding of the basic force between atoms, light, with "God said: 'Let there be light'".
No microscope or microphone witnes the molecules of our cells properly thanking Him for the light that gives them evolving variety.
Ideal democracy bows to these masses!
But these masses are whipped into 'shape' by overwhelming advertisements and evangalistic preachers paid for by billionaires who are sure their own 'values' are realy saving these masses from their base instincts. Thus thes billionaires give to the poor and thus clear their own path to Paradice.

The best solution is for all scientists to find a more rational country or create one! And subcontract their research to the rest of the world, to those who want the most reliable, understandable solutions to real problems.

Science debate moves on

Dr. Woo Ki Lee — Sat, 17 May 2008 20:49:50 GMT

Their politicians and only interested in business, money, and how to get rich. They are like the "football jock" that cannot pass one of the NCLB test--ask them to explain genetics--Hum, well it is the DNA helix of Mendel.

Each one of the Canidates, are not scientist and they leave that to the 'nerdy geek' who isn't popular with the "Washington In-crowd of the 19th Century, 1860's".

I vote for the Japanese and the development of Robotics and nanotechnology in the 21st Century!

Science debate moves on

New York Scientist, Ny,NY — Sun, 18 May 2008 00:32:09 GMT

The average person doesn't care about science or religion go around and ask people if they are religious or consider themselves scientific. I want to meet aliens and explore the galaxy. However most people will tell you fix what's wrong at home before you do anything else. Diease, poverty , hunger and please don't tell me you'll fix it with posthumanity that makes me laugh and creeps me out at the same time.
But I hope you get the money for research into space exploration because you've done a lot of good for the world and i wish you the best of luck in the future.

Science debate moves on

Bruce Williams — Sun, 18 May 2008 06:15:37 GMT

The issues science brings up don't readily yield themselves to sound bites and political slogans, which seems to be the level of public debate we have sunk to.

Does science think it has a chance in a forum dominated by slogans and debate on what is an acceptable price for a candidates haircut?

Science debate moves on

Jamie Norwood — Sun, 18 May 2008 14:29:56 GMT

Let Bob Masseys's comment represent the all 'hearts and minds' science has lost lost in an attempt to lead a peaceful coexistence with ideologies.

Science debate moves on

Bob, Meridian, Mississippi — Sun, 18 May 2008 16:47:15 GMT

I am glad at least some of the candidates are ignoring these Godless nutjobs. The only science policy this Nation Under God needs is the Bible. It's all in there, folks; just read it.

Science debate moves on

Godless "Nutjob," Ohio — Sun, 18 May 2008 21:43:56 GMT

@Bob from Meridian,

I must have missed where the Bible discusses Maxwell's Equations--Guess I should look harder.

:-/

Science debate moves on

Jimmy V, Pittsburgh, Pa — Sun, 18 May 2008 23:35:31 GMT

Maybe now people will start waking up to the NWO which controls and owns these media news stations. I mean seriously people. How many lies must we catch before we realize that we are being killed by these globalist elite leaders. Is there cures, YES! Is there intelligent alien life not from Earth, YES! Throw your tv's out the window and follow your instincs.. They are lying to all of us. Want an example. Ok, here it is.. 66% of America's water is flouridated. Children are given flouride tablets in school. I was one of them. Flouride causes tooth decay, cancer, fatigue, low sex drive, blindness, lowers IQ and many other diseases. This is FACT people. Do the research if you dont believe it. If you do believe it. Obviously, this means to stop taking it. Stop letting them give it to your children. Also, DO NOT eat or drink any thing that is diet or a substitute for sugar. The poisen is called aspartane. I might have spelled that wrong but you get the point. They are killing us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Science debate moves on

Jonnie Irwin, Albuquerque, NM — Mon, 19 May 2008 00:56:29 GMT

If we want to remain a world power, we need to keep up with scientific research. Many countries are already ahead of us in scientific study. It would behoove the candidates to at least have a working understanding of what is at stake if we let China, India, Japan and Korea keep going ahead of us in scientific matters. It's time we told the Bible-thumpers to mind their congregation and to stay out of politics. And we need the politicians to study up on the issues and learn some science. Most important -the media needs to stop pandering to the Fundamentalists and the Armageddon cults. Keep religion in church and science in the schools!

Science debate moves on

Tony Rotz, Zimmerman, Mn. — Mon, 19 May 2008 01:35:57 GMT

Science wants to be the new religion and scientists the new priests. People will be judged by their intellect, that's the "why" of the great desire of many to discredit the belief of God.

Science debate moves on

Delmar Fairchild, Barron, WI — Mon, 19 May 2008 03:07:01 GMT

The Presidency is a political position that we appoint to run a large money consuming country. They do not have the time nor the inclination to micromanage a small entity of a money consuming comglomerate like NASA. There are other politicians assigned to do that. Namely the head of NASA.
I do not think we should bash our President because some @@@ rammed those planes into the Twin Towers and changed the whole name of the game and the present future of the USA.
President Bush could have been a president who was very capable of working both sides of the aisle and getting a lot of good done for the people of not only the USA but of the world. He may have a peculiar language problem, but contrary to some peoples opinions, from of the conversations I have heard that he did on Television and radio, he is very capable of running this country and is an intelligent person.
My one wish would be that we could have gotten rid of Mr. bin Laden 9 years ago when we had the chance in the previous administration so we could have been in a very much better situation today.
President Bush has said we should go back into space and has asked Congress to fund it. However, if they do not think it is worth our while to go into outer space, there is no president that can make it happen. You see, Congress holds the purse strings. No matter who the president is this next term, he will not be capable of getting the funding needed if Congress says no. Today with the new Democratically controlled Congress, less has been done for space than all of the previous sessions of Congress since JKF. Write and complain to them, don't bash the President when there are others that will not cooperate. Here is a Statement from the President Bush's Management Agenda: (talk about wanting change)

To reform government, we must rethink government.

The need for reform is urgent. The General Accounting Office (GAO) "high-risk" list identifies areas throughout the federal government that are most vulnerable to fraud, waste, and abuse. Ten years ago, the GAO found eight such areas. Today it lists 22. Perhaps as significant, government programs too often deliver inadequate services at excessive cost. . . .

So while government needs to reform its operations--how it goes about its business and how it treats the people it serves, it also needs to rethink its purpose--how it defines what business is and what services it should provide.

The President's vision for government reform is guided by three principles. Government should be:

Citizen-centered, not bureaucracy-centered;
Results-oriented;
Market-based, actively promoting rather than stifling innovation through competition.
The President has called for a government that is active but limited, that focuses on priorities and does them well. That same spirit should be brought to the work of reform. Rather than pursue an array of management initiatives, we have elected to identify the government's most glaring problems -- and solve them. The President's Management Agenda is a starting point for management reform. ...

Read the full report at NASA.com.

Science debate moves on

CanadianQuinn, Halifax, Canada — Mon, 19 May 2008 13:28:55 GMT

The lack of progress in this area pisses me off. Each candidate thinks that science & technology are vital to continued success. Heck, Obama wants a "Manhattan Project" in various scientific areas.

The lack of traction irks me. How much of the economic progress AND perils have been due to science & technology? Enough that it fricken matters.

Science debate moves on

Michael Noonan, Perth WA, Australia — Mon, 19 May 2008 14:17:39 GMT

I hope your elections do go well. Across the world in small democracies like Australia leadership in science is vital to environment and advancing nations. The TeVatron already in the range of Higgs particle capability with the upgrade may just edge out CERN. The other candidates are micro black holes and exotic particles. There are ideas ranging from finding gravity to puncturing the earth and dropping the oceans into the salt basins under oil producing nations causing sink holes.
It is important to discover new power sources or propulsion through science and someday even the environment problems will come round with better science solutions.

Science debate moves on

citizenman — Mon, 19 May 2008 18:58:19 GMT

DELMAR FOR PRESIDENT!!!

Science debate moves on

Delmar Fairchild, Barron, WI — Mon, 19 May 2008 20:19:50 GMT

To Steve Smyth;

Here is a link to Whitehouse.com for the topic of space exploration:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/space/renewed_spirit.html

We should really read what our President would like to see happen in space exploration before we resort to name calling and belittlement. It only come back onto those that belittle.
These are very good ideas that his cabinet has come with and that he supports. Being a Politician, if he didn't support it, he wouldn't have his name associated with it.