- Joined
- Jun 9, 2011
- Messages
- 2,320
- Reaction score
- 1,033
- Location
- Planet Earth
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Earlier this week, House Republicans quietly blocked a proposal that would institute the position of science laureate of the United States. It was expected to sail by--after all, who could possibly have a problem with an honorary position that costs the taxpayers absolutely nothing, the goal of which is to promote science education? House Republicans, apparently.
In the United States, the position of laureate--the only national one of which is the poet laureate--is a largely ceremonial position. The poet laureate receives a small stipend of $35,000 a year and is given a platform to promote poetry and literature through readings, appearances, and new projects (some have promoted African diaspora poetry, some have attempted to get poetry and fiction into places like airports and waiting rooms, some have encouraged early education). The proposed science laureate would have a similar duty: Mazie Hirono, the Hawaii Democrat who co-sponsored the bill, described it as "a national role model who can encourage students to learn more about the sciences. By elevating great American scientific communicators, we can empower students--especially girls and minorities--to get excited about science." It would be an unpaid position, to be held by up to three notable American scientists.
The proposal should have passed easily. But last week, Larry Hart, a former Republican congressional aide and current representative of the American Conservative Union (the country's oldest politically conservative lobbying group), sent a letter to House Republicans claiming that this position is far from benign. Hart writes that the laureate, appointed by President Obama, "will share his view that science should serve political ends, on such issues as climate change and regulation of greenhouse gases.”
Republicans promptly pulled support for the bill, taking it off the floor schedule, meaning it may or may not ever actually see the floor again. At best, if there's pressure, it may be re-introduced in a few months. If it does, it'll face opposition from various anti-climate-change groups. Or the bill may just die.
Republicans Block Proposal For National Science Laureate, Fearing Science | Popular Science
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On surface this appear to motivated by curtailing government spending, however by looking at past behaviors, it is clear that Republicans most scary enemy is science specially fact and figures. So of course in order to prevent themselves from spiraling down the chute of irrelevancy and obscurity they have decided to attack Science from all Fronts After all less knowledge and more ignorance does seem to promote their cause and helps them keep their jobs.
It is funny how far we gone back. There use to be a time where Engineers and Scientist were revered and worshiped in this country, but now in the eyes of republicans that is called being elitist, combating ignorance with science data and fact is actually a handicapped. Phrases like "I don't have facts and figures but I believe..." is unmet with challenge or questions. Counterpoint of personal facts to contrary with fact and figures is called ambush journalism..
Country that was at the forefront of science is now lingering on periphery thanks to 30 years of republican policies and their never ending war on Science.
Diving Mullah
I was born and raised an ultra conservative Republican. I think to be a Republican today you have to lay aside reality and your patriotism. Education sucks because the Republicans found out teachers are sometimes in unions. Science is Junk because evidence abounds man contributes to global warming and the Repubs and big oil...well you get the picture. They are no longer American, they are simply antiObama.
With no other problems facing America, I think it is very important that this be resolved.
How about a Science Czar who can regulate the age of the Earth? Now, that would be useful:roll:
It is very sad that science has become politicized, and that religious extremists especially attack science because it disproves their literal bible interpretations. In past generations, America was the place for cutting edge science. We invented new technologies and attracted the brightest and best minds. This was one of the key elements that made the United States a superpower. Now, we are giving that up, and losing our intellectual dominance. It is absolutely absurd that we need to have these kinds of arguments.
You say that as if the age of the Earth is actually in doubt. Seriously, if we have to have a partisan argument over the basic validity of the scientific method, then this country is not going to be the center of the world's intellectual endeavors anymore.
Earlier this week, House Republicans quietly blocked a proposal that would institute the position of science laureate of the United States. It was expected to sail by--after all, who could possibly have a problem with an honorary position that costs the taxpayers absolutely nothing, the goal of which is to promote science education? House Republicans, apparently.
In the United States, the position of laureate--the only national one of which is the poet laureate--is a largely ceremonial position. The poet laureate receives a small stipend of $35,000 a year and is given a platform to promote poetry and literature through readings, appearances, and new projects (some have promoted African diaspora poetry, some have attempted to get poetry and fiction into places like airports and waiting rooms, some have encouraged early education). The proposed science laureate would have a similar duty: Mazie Hirono, the Hawaii Democrat who co-sponsored the bill, described it as "a national role model who can encourage students to learn more about the sciences. By elevating great American scientific communicators, we can empower students--especially girls and minorities--to get excited about science." It would be an unpaid position, to be held by up to three notable American scientists.
The proposal should have passed easily. But last week, Larry Hart, a former Republican congressional aide and current representative of the American Conservative Union (the country's oldest politically conservative lobbying group), sent a letter to House Republicans claiming that this position is far from benign. Hart writes that the laureate, appointed by President Obama, "will share his view that science should serve political ends, on such issues as climate change and regulation of greenhouse gases.”
Republicans promptly pulled support for the bill, taking it off the floor schedule, meaning it may or may not ever actually see the floor again. At best, if there's pressure, it may be re-introduced in a few months. If it does, it'll face opposition from various anti-climate-change groups. Or the bill may just die.
Republicans Block Proposal For National Science Laureate, Fearing Science | Popular Science
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On surface this appear to motivated by curtailing government spending, however by looking at past behaviors, it is clear that Republicans most scary enemy is science specially fact and figures. So of course in order to prevent themselves from spiraling down the chute of irrelevancy and obscurity they have decided to attack Science from all Fronts After all less knowledge and more ignorance does seem to promote their cause and helps them keep their jobs.
It is funny how far we gone back. There use to be a time where Engineers and Scientist were revered and worshiped in this country, but now in the eyes of republicans that is called being elitist, combating ignorance with science data and fact is actually a handicapped. Phrases like "I don't have facts and figures but I believe..." is unmet with challenge or questions. Counterpoint of personal facts to contrary with fact and figures is called ambush journalism..
Country that was at the forefront of science is now lingering on periphery thanks to 30 years of republican policies and their never ending war on Science.
Diving Mullah
It is very sad that science has become politicized, and that religious extremists especially attack science because it disproves their literal bible interpretations. In past generations, America was the place for cutting edge science. We invented new technologies and attracted the brightest and best minds. This was one of the key elements that made the United States a superpower. Now, we are giving that up, and losing our intellectual dominance. It is absolutely absurd that we need to have these kinds of arguments.
You say that as if the age of the Earth is actually in doubt. Seriously, if we have to have a partisan argument over the basic validity of the scientific method, then this country is not going to be the center of the world's intellectual endeavors anymore.
andWith no other problems facing America, I think it is very important that this be resolved.
REALLY? Sure 6,000 years was exaggeration since the Earth is less than 5800 years old but I was just rounding off.:dohHow about a Science Czar who can regulate the age of the Earth? Now, that would be useful
Really? "A never-ending war on Science?" Really? "Where engineers and scientists were revered?" Please list your evidence that Republicans have waged this never-ending war on science you speak of. And why we're suddenly at war with them because Republican legislators didn't support some ridiculous Science Laureate program dreamed up by Democrats. And. Does this mean Democrats have been at war with scientists since it's taken 200+ years for them to propose said namby-pamby position?
A poet laureate I can understand. Sort of. Why our Federal government even does this is beyond me. But at least that is supporting the arts. The arts need support and encouragement. Scientists? They're amply supported by, wait for it!!! Private enterprise.
Paschendale, did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? I realize that sometimes my witty sarcasms go over peoples heads and I get in trouble but honestly: and REALLY? Sure 6,000 years was exaggeration since the Earth is less than 5800 years old but I was just rounding off.:doh
Yet there have been articles indicating that what we thought may not have been true not just about the age of the earth, but the age of the universe. Why people want to fight over something that has no practical implications though, is beyond me.
Beyond that, don't pretend that it is only a bunch of religious extremists politicizing science. Scientist politicize science because they want the public funding and then pretend to be the victim. If someone were really interested in promoting science, they would care less about whether or not there is a symbolic scientist and more about the fact that qualified science teachers are functionally extinct because there are so few people going into the field with the desire or intent to actually teach K-12 science.
You may not have meant it seriously (and there really wasn't any way to tell and I didn't remember your personal position off the top of my head) but a lot of people do. There are arguments over the basic validity of science. These are the same people who try to make sure that kids are taught that the foundations of modern biology are lies. Not just mistakes, but lies. I get a little upset about that. Don't you?
Right, it's not just religious nuts, it's the climate science deniers, too.
Earlier this week, House Republicans quietly blocked a proposal that would institute the position of science laureate of the United States. It was expected to sail by--after all, who could possibly have a problem with an honorary position that costs the taxpayers absolutely nothing, the goal of which is to promote science education? House Republicans, apparently.
In the United States, the position of laureate--the only national one of which is the poet laureate--is a largely ceremonial position. The poet laureate receives a small stipend of $35,000 a year and is given a platform to promote poetry and literature through readings, appearances, and new projects (some have promoted African diaspora poetry, some have attempted to get poetry and fiction into places like airports and waiting rooms, some have encouraged early education). The proposed science laureate would have a similar duty: Mazie Hirono, the Hawaii Democrat who co-sponsored the bill, described it as "a national role model who can encourage students to learn more about the sciences. By elevating great American scientific communicators, we can empower students--especially girls and minorities--to get excited about science." It would be an unpaid position, to be held by up to three notable American scientists.
The proposal should have passed easily. But last week, Larry Hart, a former Republican congressional aide and current representative of the American Conservative Union (the country's oldest politically conservative lobbying group), sent a letter to House Republicans claiming that this position is far from benign. Hart writes that the laureate, appointed by President Obama, "will share his view that science should serve political ends, on such issues as climate change and regulation of greenhouse gases.”
Republicans promptly pulled support for the bill, taking it off the floor schedule, meaning it may or may not ever actually see the floor again. At best, if there's pressure, it may be re-introduced in a few months. If it does, it'll face opposition from various anti-climate-change groups. Or the bill may just die.
Republicans Block Proposal For National Science Laureate, Fearing Science | Popular Science
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On surface this appear to motivated by curtailing government spending, however by looking at past behaviors, it is clear that Republicans most scary enemy is science specially fact and figures. So of course in order to prevent themselves from spiraling down the chute of irrelevancy and obscurity they have decided to attack Science from all Fronts After all less knowledge and more ignorance does seem to promote their cause and helps them keep their jobs.
It is funny how far we gone back. There use to be a time where Engineers and Scientist were revered and worshiped in this country, but now in the eyes of republicans that is called being elitist, combating ignorance with science data and fact is actually a handicapped. Phrases like "I don't have facts and figures but I believe..." is unmet with challenge or questions. Counterpoint of personal facts to contrary with fact and figures is called ambush journalism..
Country that was at the forefront of science is now lingering on periphery thanks to 30 years of republican policies and their never ending war on Science.
Diving Mullah
I was born and raised an ultra conservative Republican. I think to be a Republican today you have to lay aside reality and your patriotism. Education sucks because the Republicans found out teachers are sometimes in unions. Science is Junk because evidence abounds man contributes to global warming and the Repubs and big oil...well you get the picture. They are no longer American, they are simply antiObama.
Much like keeping people in the dark about gov't programs such as SS and Medicare and how they negatively effect the country correct? Don't act as if liberals are so forth right and innocent while the "evil" right wing holds back all truth. It's a ridiculous argument based in partisan hackery and nothing else.It seems many Republicans now believe that keeping Americans in the dark about science (and economics) is the only way they can prevail. They have adopted the same goals as Alqeda and the Taliban. It is an abomination that will fail in all cases.
Earlier this week, House Republicans quietly blocked a proposal that would institute the position of science laureate of the United States. It was expected to sail by--after all, who could possibly have a problem with an honorary position that costs the taxpayers absolutely nothing, the goal of which is to promote science education? House Republicans, apparently.
In the United States, the position of laureate--the only national one of which is the poet laureate--is a largely ceremonial position. The poet laureate receives a small stipend of $35,000 a year and is given a platform to promote poetry and literature through readings, appearances, and new projects (some have promoted African diaspora poetry, some have attempted to get poetry and fiction into places like airports and waiting rooms, some have encouraged early education). The proposed science laureate would have a similar duty: Mazie Hirono, the Hawaii Democrat who co-sponsored the bill, described it as "a national role model who can encourage students to learn more about the sciences. By elevating great American scientific communicators, we can empower students--especially girls and minorities--to get excited about science." It would be an unpaid position, to be held by up to three notable American scientists.
The proposal should have passed easily. But last week, Larry Hart, a former Republican congressional aide and current representative of the American Conservative Union (the country's oldest politically conservative lobbying group), sent a letter to House Republicans claiming that this position is far from benign. Hart writes that the laureate, appointed by President Obama, "will share his view that science should serve political ends, on such issues as climate change and regulation of greenhouse gases.”
Republicans promptly pulled support for the bill, taking it off the floor schedule, meaning it may or may not ever actually see the floor again. At best, if there's pressure, it may be re-introduced in a few months. If it does, it'll face opposition from various anti-climate-change groups. Or the bill may just die.
Republicans Block Proposal For National Science Laureate, Fearing Science | Popular Science
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On surface this appear to motivated by curtailing government spending, however by looking at past behaviors, it is clear that Republicans most scary enemy is science specially fact and figures. So of course in order to prevent themselves from spiraling down the chute of irrelevancy and obscurity they have decided to attack Science from all Fronts After all less knowledge and more ignorance does seem to promote their cause and helps them keep their jobs.
It is funny how far we gone back. There use to be a time where Engineers and Scientist were revered and worshiped in this country, but now in the eyes of republicans that is called being elitist, combating ignorance with science data and fact is actually a handicapped. Phrases like "I don't have facts and figures but I believe..." is unmet with challenge or questions. Counterpoint of personal facts to contrary with fact and figures is called ambush journalism..
Country that was at the forefront of science is now lingering on periphery thanks to 30 years of republican policies and their never ending war on Science.
Diving Mullah
Dear Congressman,
On behalf of the American Conservative Union, I urge you to vote “NO” on the Zoe Lofgren bill, H.R. 1891, creating the position of Science Laureate of the United States, when it comes up on the suspension calendar on Tuesday.
This bill has not been approved by the House Science Committee, and by putting it on the suspension calendar, there is no chance for amendment or adequate debate.
Although the bill seems innocuous, it will provide the opportunity for President Obama to make an appointment of someone (or more than one person) who will share his view that science should serve political ends, on such issues as climate change and regulation of greenhouse gases. The bill allows the appointment of up to three Science Laureates simultaneously. The bill as written also gives President Obama the power to decide the term of the Science Laureate up to two years. None of these provisions can be amended under Suspension of the Rules.
This bill is a needless addition to the long list of presidential appointments and should at least be considered in committee before being acted on without amendment. Please vote “NO” on H.R. 1891, the Science Laureate bill.
Sincerely,
Larry Hart
Director of Government Relations
American Conservative Union
It is very sad that science has become politicized, and that religious extremists especially attack science because it disproves their literal bible interpretations. In past generations, America was the place for cutting edge science. We invented new technologies and attracted the brightest and best minds. This was one of the key elements that made the United States a superpower. Now, we are giving that up, and losing our intellectual dominance. It is absolutely absurd that we need to have these kinds of arguments.
.
there are 13 national science agencies in operation.. all with budgets that cover advertising and public relations.
here is the text of the letter sent to house Republicans
Letter Urging Congress to Vote “No” On the Science Laureate Bill | ACU
the " be scared of what obama will do!! " angle is certainly present.. it's only part of the message.. it seems to me that the rules suspensions that disallow amendments and debate is a very good point to raise...as is the appointment being wholly unnecessary.
and the article is wrong, Mazie Hirono has nothing to do with this bill ( she's in the Senate, not the House.. her bill is S.899.. and it's still in committee)... the article's author could at least get the basic facts down.
This bill has not been approved by the House Science Committee, and by putting it on the suspension calendar, there is no chance for amendment or adequate debate.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On surface this appear to motivated by curtailing government spending, however by looking at past behaviors, it is clear that Republicans most scary enemy is science specially fact and figures. So of course in order to prevent themselves from spiraling down the chute of irrelevancy and obscurity they have decided to attack Science from all Fronts After all less knowledge and more ignorance does seem to promote their cause and helps them keep their jobs.
It is funny how far we gone back. There use to be a time where Engineers and Scientist were revered and worshiped in this country, but now in the eyes of republicans that is called being elitist, combating ignorance with science data and fact is actually a handicapped. Phrases like "I don't have facts and figures but I believe..." is unmet with challenge or questions. Counterpoint of personal facts to contrary with fact and figures is called ambush journalism..
Country that was at the forefront of science is now lingering on periphery thanks to 30 years of republican policies and their never ending war on Science.
Diving Mullah[/FONT][/COLOR]
I was born and raised an ultra conservative Republican. I think to be a Republican today you have to lay aside reality and your patriotism. Education sucks because the Republicans found out teachers are sometimes in unions. Science is Junk because evidence abounds man contributes to global warming and the Repubs and big oil...well you get the picture. They are no longer American, they are simply antiObama.
This is actually funny because ACU one of the arguments is that the
Now Lets look at the some of the House Science Committee.....
Iowa Congressman Steve King made headlines last week for his colorful denials of climate change, but his muddling of scientific facts is not new from Republican leaders. Here are just some of the things Republican members of the House Science Committee have said about global warming:
1. Rep. Lamar Smith (Texas): ”We now know that prominent scientists were so determined to advance the idea of human-made global warming that they worked together to hide contradictory temperature data,” Smith said in 2009.
Science says… Smith was referring to reports that the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia tampered with data to fabricate a global warming trend. An independent review has since found that data was not tampered with or hidden.
2. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (California): “Just so you know, global warming is a total fraud and it is being designed by—what you’ve got is you’ve got liberals who get elected at the local level want state government to do the work and let them make the decisions. Then, at the state level, they want the federal government to do it. And at the federal government, they want to create global government to control all of our lives,” Rohrabacher said earlier this month.
Science says… Global warming is not a liberal conspiracy. In fact, there are Republican leaders who support climate change research: former Republican Rep. Bob Inglis, for example, who now heads the Energy and Enterprise Initiative at George Mason University. The organization’s mission is to convince conservatives that climate change is real.
3. Rep. Ralph M. Hall (Texas): “I’m really more fearful of freezing. And I don’t have any science to prove that. But we have a lot of science that tells us [climate scientists are] not basing it on real scientific facts. And we need to listen to more,” Hall told the National Journal in 2011.
Science says… NASA has a whole website dedicated to the scientific facts that prove global warming and are not disputable, from clearly rising sea levels to visibly shrinking ice sheets.
Hall had one thing right though: A fear of freezing, or frigophobia, is real.
4. Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner (Wisconsin): “I personally believe that the solar flares are more responsible for climatic cycles than anything that human beings do and our lunar, our rovers on Mars have indicated that there has been a slight warming in the atmosphere of Mars and that certainly was not caused by the internal combustion engine,” he said in 2009.
Science says… Solar flares are not relevant to global warming, and Mars is not warming globally.
5. Rep. Paul Broun (Georgia): “Scientists all over this world say that the idea of human induced global climate change is one of the greatest hoaxes perpetrated out of the scientific community. It is a hoax. There is no scientific consensus,” Broun said on the House floor in 2009.
Science says… 97% of climate experts agree that global warming is real, and is caused by humans.
6. Rep. Randy Hultgren (Illinois): “Over the thousands of years that’s been recorded we’ve had both colder times and warmer times. It happens to be that we’ve recently come out of a warmer time and now actually we’re headed in to a little bit of a colder time, the impact of the sun is much different than impact that we could have had,” he said in 2009.
Science says… We are not headed into a cooling period.
7. Rep. Steve Stockman (Texas): “I want to talk to you today about the new fad thing that’s going through America and around the world: it’s called global warming,” Stockman said in a web video in 2009.
Science says… Global warming isn’t exactly a “new fad thing.” In 1896, Swedish scientist Svante Arrehnius suggested that burning fossil fuels would add CO2 to the Earth’s atmosphere, which would then raise the globe’s average temperature.
8. Rep. Thomas Massie (Kentucky): “I would challenge [President Obama] to show us the linkage—the undeniable linkage—between droughts and the change of weather, and some kind of human activity,” Massie, an MIT graduate, said earlier this year.
Science says… Rising greenhouse-gas levels, created in part by burning fossil fuels (i.e. coal and oil), have been found to play a role in the growing intensity of rain and snow.
9. Rep. Kevin Cramer (North Dakota): “These mandates and these wind farms are all based on this fraudulent science from the EPA, meaning their claim that CO2 is a pollutant and is causing global warming…We know the globe is cooling.”
Science says… Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant in that the Webster’s definition that pollution is “to make physically impure or unclean: Befoul, dirty,” but, as Dr. Jeffrey Masters of Weather Underground writes, “Webster’s also has the definition: ‘to contaminate (an environment) esp. with man-made waste.’ Carbon dioxide is a waste gas produced by fossil fuel combustion, so can be classified as man-made waste. One can also make the case that carbon dioxide is contaminating the environment, since increased CO2 from burning fossil fuels has already harmed sea life.”
Also, the globe is not cooling.
10. Rep. Chris Stewart (Utah): “I’m not as convinced as a lot of people are that man-made climate change is the threat they think it is,” he said earlier this year.
Science says… It’s a threat to food supplies, could cause more infectious diseases, and will cause more animals to struggle to simply exist — just to name a few things.
enough said!
Diving Mullah
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?