A few weeks ago I wrote about what what the Presidential candidates think about science. At the time, I said there wasn’t much on Obama, for example.
That’s no longer true. Popular Mechanics has posted a guide to some sci-tech issues and what the candidates think about them. The interesting issues (since you’re sitting here reading a science blog) are science/education and space. There are links there for Clinton and Obama, though interestingly not for McCain or Huckabee (who, as I write this, is still campaigning). Their list is not terribly up-to-date, as they still list Romney, who dropped out a while back now.
I didn’t see anything gasp-worthy in the statements made by either Clinton or Obama. Both will support science education, both want climate change studied, both want make sure NASA continues its bold exploration blah blah blah. Don’t get me wrong: they both look pretty good in these categories, it’s just that the statements are pretty much boilerplate (that is, standard rhetoric). I’d like to see some specifics other than "complete the space station". How about, put a human on the Moon by 2020? Send a robotic mission to probe the ice in Europa? Make sure we have enough tracking and data relay satellites to support long-range and long-term high-data rate missions?
I know, science and space aren’t key issues with most voters. But I suspect they are to readers of this blog, so there you go. More grist for the mill. I’ll be voting on issues like the economy, the war, immunity for telecoms, torture, foreign policy, and the like. But my eye will also be on science issues, because in my opinion (and let’s face it, it’s more than that– it’s a fact) they are also critically important to our future.
February 13th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Who ever mentions a Europa ice mission gets my vote!
February 13th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Didn’t king george the second at one point state he wanted to put a human on Mars?
It sucks that the first president to (possibly) claim that is a royal D-Bag.
February 13th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/080213-titan-oil.html
Titan has more oil than Earth
February 13th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
How about, put a human on the Moon by 2020?
Yes, I can picture it now:
“That’s one small step for a man….. erm, that’s it, really.”
February 13th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
“All these worlds are yours except Europa. Attempt no landings there!”
February 13th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
We could pack lighter if Ganymede had a bit of greening…
February 13th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
I don’t know what the exact figure is, but everything I’ve read suggests that the space program has generated far more money in technology spinoffs than it has cost. I suspect the tax revenues alone from high-tech companies far exceed what goes into the program.
Someone ought to tell the politicians that space exploration is good for business. Do you think maybe then they’d get a clue?
February 13th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
How about, put a human on the Moon by 2020?
How about not? Sorry, Phil, but I just fear another Apollo blowout. Lots of $$$ and then… nothing to show for it beyond footprints. I really want to see things done in a logical and progressive manner.
The ISS may suck, but it could be a worker’s shack for a proper station.
Develop some real orbital industries like solar power farms. I’m tired of theory articles. The numbers seem to add up. Let’s do it.
Send a robotic mission to probe the ice in Europa?
OK that one I’d go for. Maybe a Mars sample return mission, too, especially if they poke around the edges of the ice caps.
I’ll be voting on issues like the economy, the war, immunity for telecoms, torture, foreign policy, and the like.
I support more torture.
Oops. Sorry. My BDSM kink kicked in there. You mean the real kind.
###Bottom Line###
I support the candidate most likely to leave me and mine the hell alone. Selfish? Yes. Deal with it. My life is mine.
Sadly, that is precisely none of them except maybe Ron Paul. But, oh, Paul’s a “theocrat” according to folks in these parts.
Actually, it might be Obama. If he wins he might just spends eight years giving flowery speeches about the arc of the moral universe and how he’ll wave his magic wand and make everybody love one another as we all live the high life with perfect health and a pony.
At least until the winter falls upon us,
catching us unprepared,
bringing wolves and cold starvation,
as the hearts of men despair.
February 13th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Warning: Devil’s Advocacy
Someone ought to tell the politicians that space exploration is good for business. Do you think maybe then they’d get a clue?
No, because they already know this. They either don’t care, or make decisions based on factors they feel are more important.
As the late Sen Proxmire once said, “What’s the hurry? Mars isn’t going anywhere.”
I could also point out how so many pro-space arguments come from people involved directly or peripherally with space exploration/exploitation. If I can’t trust a global warming opinion from someone who once worked for an oil company, how can I trust these other folks to be unbiased?
There’s also the problem with NASA itself. Is it really doing us any good in the long term vis a vis getting into space? In constant dollars, the cost of payloads per pound have gone up by about a factor of 10.
The ISS was designed and built with little recognition of commercial potential. Many of the experiments it was designed for can either be done on Earth or with small, dedicated probes. My goodness, look at the revolution in cosmology the little WMAP probe caused!
I’d be tempted to break NASA up into more focused, autonomous units. Make JPL the complete center for planetary exploration (it almost is already). The Langley Research Center could become the spacecraft and aeronautics design core. We could give DARPA-like grants or tax breaks for commercial development of space, especially in the area of reducing the cost per pound to orbit.
We have GOT to get rid of the cruft and seek to make space efforts efficient and profitable.
February 13th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Let’s assume for a moment that either Mr. Obama (whom I’m for) or Mrs. Clinton (who I’d vote for if she gets the nomination) are personally interested in space exploration projects or sending a robot to Europa or more solar system research.
It isn’t only that science and space aren’t key issues with most voters; it’s more like mentioning great science projects during their campaigns draws away from these issues and also can be politically leveraged against them by the other side. One can easily imagine the Republicans saying the Democrats want to “build spaceships while America faces dangers from terrorists” or “…while the economy sinks (ignoring the irony)”… etc…Though Bush himself promised what sounded like giant space projects which he and the White House have since backed far away from, so the Democrats could throw all that back at them. “”We will fulfill the broken promises…”
During campaigning, any science will be a footnote to other issues, but a footnote can be well thought out. The Democratic candidates could fine tune the science messages in speeches, with concrete proposals, framed within the rhetoric that addresses the “fulfillment of past achievements,” acknowledging and facing the challenges of climate change, and chief among them, “bringing America into the future,” thus also politically profiling the other side with the Moon Hoax Believers, Creationists and Evangelicals, most of whom form a major base within the Republican party.
February 13th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
According to Maryland Physics Professor Bob Park, the man who Dr. Plait says doesn’t know what he’s talking about, manned space flight is a gigantic waste of money. Apparently, Prof. Park, according to his web site, is going into hibernation for a while so I guess he can be ignored.
February 13th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
I don’t say Bob doesn’t know what he’s talking about. I say Bob is wrong. That’s different.
February 13th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Correction, Prof. Parks’ hibernation has been canceled. I’m sure that he will provide some good ammunition against manned space flight, starting with the comment below.
“5. SPACE STATION: SCIENCE LABORATORY IS LAUNCHED.
The rickety shuttle Atlantis finally took off yesterday after two months of delays, carrying the European science laboratory “Columbus” to the ISS. It was supposed to be launched in 1992 to mark the 500th anniversary of the discovery of the New World, but clocks slow down on the ISS, and the Columbia shuttle disaster set it back even further. Press reports described the equipment on Columbus, but I found no mention of the experiments if any. It’s a fine laboratory, lacking only a purpose. “
February 13th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
“Promise them anything…” is the word from any, ANY politician running for any office. Presidential candidates say many things, even about science and space exploration, and know that they will not/can not fulfill any promises made. There’s always a spoiler waiting to cut them off. Congress, party advisers, religious groups, popular opinion, etc. influence what a President is able to do. Unfortunately, what Presidents can do is sometimes bad for the country, in spite of all these constraints.
So, let’s not put too much faith or hope in what any candidate says about science and all it’s kith-n-kin.
Privatization may be the key to much of space developement, especially if profit is there. Let’s here it for privatization, profit, Superman and the American way.
February 13th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
For what it’s worth, Clinton *does* have pretty specific things in mind (including another doubling of the NIH budget over ten years). To my knowledge, she’s the only one who has said clearly that she will increase science funding:
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/innovation/
February 13th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
None that anyone asked, but,
I feel there’s precisely one issue:
Climate Change
because, in light of that issue, others don’t matter.
But, that, too, is an issue where solutions will be worked by…science.
February 14th, 2008 at 3:35 am
I’m not American and I don’t even live in the US. But it really worries me when anti-science guys like Bush become US president. America is so large and strong in many ways, it really affects the rest of the world who is sitting at the White House. I heard at the Skeptics’ Guide to the Universe podcast that Huckabee declared he doesn’t “believe” in evolution… that was very disturbing.
February 14th, 2008 at 5:58 am
I haven’t got time to explore in detail (after all, it’s not my country) but I can’t help wondering if you won’t get a better impression of the candidates’ true attitudes to science from the other categories like Climate and Energy, or Environment. Space is sexy, commitment to following the evidence where it leads on climate isn’t.
February 14th, 2008 at 9:07 am
Re Phil Plait
I am sorry Dr. Plait but you definitely said that Prof. Park didn’t know what he was talking about in response to a comment I made on a thread several months ago. That is an exact quote. Prof. Park was also interviewed on the Skeptics Guide to the Universe a year or so ago and explained why he is considers manned space flight to be a waste of resources.
My personal opinion on the matter is that I would favor manned space excursions if NASA had a budget sufficient to support both them and the various scientific activities it is supposed to be engaging in. Since that is not the case, I am in favor of canning most manned space excursions (other then activities such as repair of the Hubble Space Telescope) as not cost effective in terms of scientific achievement as compared with the unmanned activities.
As a for instance, I consider the exploration of the moon Europa to be possibly the most important activity we could undertake Finding life of any sort in what appears to be a liquid water ocean under the ice layer of that body would be IMHO, the greatest discovery in the history of the human race.
February 14th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Love Bob Park’s weekly emails and his books and I have a great deal of respect for his opinions. Even when it comes to manned space flight he is logically and factually correct. He is still wrong though.
We must have manned exploration of space for the simple fact it is there. For the same reason people climb mountains, go to Antarctica, parachute, scuba dive, go bushwalking or swim with humpback whales. It helps define our humanity, it’s fun and it’s there.
February 15th, 2008 at 2:31 am
“… immunity for telecoms…”
From http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Turley_The_fix_has_been_in_0214.html
“Republican John McCain and Barack Obama both voted on amendments to the measure; Obama opposed telecom immunity, while McCain supported it. Clinton left town early to get to a campaign stop in Texas.
“Although he voted to sustain a filibuster on the FISA update, Obama left Washington for a campaign stop in Wisconisn without voting on the final bill.”
But, regardless, the House of Representatives failed to act at all on the FISA bill passed by the Senate and the law has lapsed. Still leaving the telecom industry in a bind with existing lawsuits.
Ugggh…I hate the thought of having to vote this fall!
February 15th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
for more on the presidential candidates on science, you should check out http://www.sharp.sefora.org….they have candidate profiles and a wiki
March 2nd, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Regarding Huckabee’s knowledge of Science and Geography.
There is a comedian/journalist up here in Canada named Rick Mercer.
He used to occassionally go and interview Americans about their understanding of Canada, and issues of importance to Canadians.
On one visit he went to Arkansas. The Arkansas capital buildings, he found, were a scaled down copy of the National capital buildings in Washington. He told his credulous American interview subjects that Canada’s capital buildings were also copied on the US capital buildings (!)
Those he showed on in the segment believed this (!) Except, he told them, they were made of ice (!) However, with global warming, Canada faced the grave danger that its capital building were in danger of melting. So, we had a plan to enclose the ice capital in a big dome.
This segment captured various Arkansasers congratulating Canada on saving its capital building
Then he asked several Arkansasers if Governor Huckabee was an intelligent, well-educated man. They assured him he was. One old codger assured him, if Governor Huckabee needs to know something, then he knows it.
The segment ends with Governor Huckabee waving at the Camera, and saying: “Congratulations Canada on saving your National Ice Palace!”l
he told the ordinary.
I am sure I don’t have to remind your readers that Ottawa is at about the same latitude as Seattle.