Monday, March 24, 2008

NYT: Science at risk to politics?

Note the sentence in bold within the NYT story; this is the ever-present attempt by political elements to blame everything deemed wrong with this planet on the Bush administration, including the lie of global warming, which is ironic because Bush actually (stupidly) backs all of this global warming nonsense.

Since when did Al Gore qualify as a bringer of science? Is he on par with Einstein or Newton? I know he claims to tout science in his rhetoric, but his claims and presentations have proven flawed on many levels. Ladies and I really need to remind you that Al Gore is a politician? Remember his years in the Senate? Remember his years as Vice President? Remember his run for the White House in 2000? How in the hell did he become elevated to the level of an exalted scholar of science on a subject in which he has ZERO EXPERIENCE (either practically or academically)--a subject with POLITICAL IMPLICATIONS in terms of its potential solutions?

I love how one side of politics in this country tries to claim the high ground; they, and only they, are following "science," which is often called "consensus" to halt debate. The implication is that this "science" is devoid of politics, which is absurd. This so-called scientifically proven "problem" has everything to do with grant funding and politics.

Don't be fooled, America! Remember, it's the NYT!

Science at Risk - New York Times:

Nobody was greatly surprised last week when Stephen Johnson, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, proposed new limits on smog-forming pollutants that were weaker than those his scientists had recommended — and more to the liking of industry. In the Bush administration, contests between politics and science are usually resolved in favor of politics.

No comments: