State of the science debate

smita, Detroit, MI — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 04:22:26 GMT

Hilarious discussion between Hillary and obama. Must watch.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7150u9sfCo

State of the science debate

Wayne, Alamogordo, NM — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 17:11:03 GMT

A scientific debate between the candidates that close to the election is probably not going to happen. And I'm not sure it would make a difference anyway. Think about, what are all politicians good at? Lying! They'll say anything they think the people listening want to hear. So why don't we go on past voting records of the candidates. Oh yeah, I forgot, two of them have little to no past record to go on. Duh! How about having a Congressional debate? Wait a second, aren't they the ones who have gotten us into the mess we're in? Are they likely to do any better in the future? Let's face it, we're screwed.

Now, concerning population control - the clock is ticking. Planet sustainability is going to reach a breaking point in the not to distant future. The issues are numerous: land use, water, food, garbage disposal, breathable air, nuclear waste disposal (the list goes on and on). Some of these issues can, and will, be solved through scientific engineering. But at what cost to taxpayers? Other issues will require moral and ethical decisions to be made. Who's going to stand up and say "You can't have more than one child"; "You can only use 50 gallons of water a week"; "You can only generate 1 lb of garbage a day"? I believe the future holds many wonderful scientific discoveries and breakthroughs, but I also believe we as a society, and eventually, the entire human race, are going to have to make some tough decisions in the future as well.

State of the science debate

pm, colorado — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 17:33:33 GMT

Jealous I am not when engineers, doctors and scholars spit their wits competing reasonable on doubts and know how. But here's my take which, nowhere science nor ignorance. Let's agree with all the comments being correct and scholarly precise to the point. I just wish that in all the time mankind spend on their
sanity, kindly twick your graying noodles, give it a
try on how to make it even for the radical muslims, taliban, al-qaeda and the terrorist to accept the co-exist livehood on this superball/earth. Without that,
all your magical wishdom is dome, compared to their
simplistic approach dealing with, "inequity"* Build it
and they will blow it to oblivion.

State of the science debate

OneVoice — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 18:33:55 GMT

I think this it would be great to get the dems and reps to discuss science & technology topics. To me, they spend too much time talking about their own favorite subjects and not enough time on ones that will greatly impact us in the next 4 years. I also hope that Nader gets an invite too. The debate needs to have more than just the two party view.

State of the science debate

Mark Brown, Portland, OR — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 23:12:00 GMT

David Boyle identified the biggest challenge facing Earth, and the most difficult to deal with because of emotions and rights issues tied to birth and child rearing. Even the stupidest, most morally corrupt individuals can perpetuate their DNA...now that's scary! I truly do believe we have corrupted evolution by allowing stupid people to breed indiscriminately.
It would be ideal if everyone could be sterilized until they have completed child rearing education and financial means testing. Alas, that will probably never happen, so we’ll keep breeding ourselves into oblivion. Why do so many people treat birth as something special? It’s the one thing every animal on the planet can do; it doesn’t exactly speak well for our collective intelligence!

State of the science debate

Andy Motherway — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 23:41:56 GMT

Well, Alan, what sort of clout do you have there? Why not get MSNBC on board to televise and moderate?

If this debate does NOT happen in view of a large audience, then that will be extrememly unfortunate for the American people.

State of the science debate

Alan Boyle — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 01:20:43 GMT

Andy, there are people at MSNBC (and NBC) who have way more clout than I do, and they would love to televise any debate involving the major candidates. The issue is, which venues are the ones where those candidates will want to show up? Since I wrote this item, there's been more and more talk about having a debate at the National Constitution Center in about the same time frame. I'm feeling as if we'll find out what the debate plan will be in the next week or so (maybe a couple of days), but if it came down to the Constitution Center vs. the Franklin Institute ... I think the Constitution Center would win out. I suppose there's a scenario in which Clinton and Obama would appear at a traditional debate one night and then something of a "science town hall" one or two nights later ... we'll just have to see how this all shakes out.

State of the science debate

Kathryn, Baltimore, MD — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:21:45 GMT

Unfortunately, this debate is a sham. They invited four candidates based on an arbitrary definition of "viability," thus leaving out two candidates with very interesting and knowledgeable viewpoints on science and environmental policy: Mike Gravel, a former Governor and Congressman from Alaska, and Ron Paul, a medical doctor (ie, he has a degree in science). Since then, they have had to "withdraw" their invitation to Mike Huckabee, since he has dropped out of the race! And I agree with OneVoice - let's get Nader on stage, too.

State of the science debate

Dr. Russell Herman, Wilmington, NC — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 00:01:19 GMT

This issue should not be allowed to rest. It would be nice to get through to the moderators of the next debate (tomorrow) between the Democrats and ask that there be some time devoted to the candidates views on issues in science. If there cannot be a debate only aimed at science, then there should be a portion devoted to science policy - not only about science education in public school, but policy on research, scientific budgets, helping science majors, raising the scientific literacy of the public, etc.

There is little space here to promote the issues, but the moderator of this site should be able to put a bug in someone's ear that this very important issue for the future of our country and its standing needs to be aired. If the candidates refuse to put this issue in the public eye, then that is a good reason not to vote for any of them. I certainly hope that is not the case. The future of our children depends on being able to educate them and bring their level of scientific literacy much higher than the current administration has done.

Please find a way to start getting all of the news media to bring this topic to the table. It is so amazing that in this century the politicians and others prefer a debate focusing on religion and rejecting one on science. This in the long run will lead to a further deterioration of our standing in science.