Archive for March 12th, 2009

The Evolution of Homer

By Sheril Kirshenbaum | March 12, 2009 1:51 pm

Every now and then The Intersection likes to pay tribute to the family that has been kicking it in Springfield for the last 20 years. Today we present EvolutionSimpsons style:

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Culture, Evolution
MORE ABOUT: Evolution, The Simpsons

Kolbert on Global Warming, Scientists, and the Media: "Total System Failure"

By Chris Mooney | March 12, 2009 12:15 pm

Yale Environment 360 interviews the renowned New Yorker journalist, who blames the media and scientists alike for our staggering failure to deal with this issue. Here’s a long quotation:

e360: We’ve talked about journalists and generally the challenges in conveying this issue to the public. But what about scientists? I mean, scientists have a responsibility to get their information out to the public whether it’s through the media or through their own writings and work. How good a job do you think they have done in conveying this whole issue?

Kolbert: Oh, I don’t think they’ve done a good job. They have some of the same problems that journalists have, which is that scientists are interested in introducing something new in their work. They want new results, new information. They want to break new ground. They need to do that to get funding, really. And global warming, the fact that global warming is happening, that is really old news in scientific circles. It’s just a settled question in scientific circles. So scientists moved on to other issues having to do with climate change…

e360: But not whether it exists?

Kolbert: No, absolutely not. That would be considered — you’d just be laughed at in a scientific discussion. But that message really never reached the public, and you could argue that that’s the journalists’ fault, and I do fault journalists for that. But I also fault scientists because they sort of have just left things to the journalists. And now that we’ve sort of moved to a new stage of the debate, a policy debate, they’re not going to be involved in that either. They’re going to leave that to the economists or to the political scientists.

The public of course isn’t innocent either–and many politicians, to say nothing of the active sowers of misinformation, are deeply guilty. And that’s why the phrase “total system failure,” which Kolbert uses later in the interview, really does seem to capture it best.

You can read the full interview here.

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Education, Global Warming, Hurricanes

Science on the Campaign Trail

By Chris Mooney | March 12, 2009 9:56 am

A really great Issues in Science and Technology article by Sheril and our ScienceDebate2008 colleague (and CEO) Shawn Otto is now available online here. It is a look back at the unprecedented ScienceDebate initiative and the not inconsiderable impact it had on the campaign–despite numerous hurdles, including an uninterested media and candidates who were not exactly jumping to debate science policy. An excerpt:

Although the candidates still refused to debate, instead attending yet another faith forum at Saddleback Church in California, Science Debate 2008 was able to obtain written answers from both candidates. The Obama campaign tapped the expertise of his impressive campaign science advisory team to help him answer. The McCain campaign relied on their brilliant and multitasking senior domestic policy advisor, the economist and former Congressional Budget Office director Douglas Holtz-Eakin.

Once the answers were in hand, the Science Debate initiative was finally “news” from a political editor’s perspective. It was providing the candidates’ positions in their own words on a wide variety of substantive issues, and suddenly the floodgates opened. In the final month of the campaigns, reporters were looking for ways to differentiate the candidates, and political reporters started taking apart the nuances in the answers’ rhetoric. Obama, for example, expressly talked about a variety of international approaches to addressing climate change, and reporters noted that McCain remained silent on international issues and steered far away from the Kyoto Protocol.

The responses highlighted other, broader differences between the candidates. Senator Obama stressed his plans to double the federal agency research budgets, whereas Senator McCain stressed further corporate deregulation and tax credits to stimulate more corporate R&D, coupled with big money prizes to reward targeted breakthroughs. This philosophical difference carried through in answers on energy policy, education, innovation, and other areas. Senator Obama’s team further refined his answers into his official science policy platform. Senator McCain’s answer to the stem cell question came briefly into play in the race when his running mate, Governor Sarah Palin, contradicted it in an interview with James Dobson and was subsequently described as “going rogue.” In another answer and followup interview, Senator McCain claimed to have been responsible for the development of wi-fi and Blackberry-like devices, which caused a minor tempest. Senator Obama made news when 61 Nobel laureates, led by Obama science advisory team leader Harold Varmus, signed a letter in support of his campaign, and the answers of both candidates to the questions of Science Debate 2008 served as the basis for a letter signed by 178 organizations urging the winner to appoint a science advisor by January 20 and elevate the post to cabinet level.

References to the candidates’ science policy views eventually appeared in almost every major U.S. paper and in a wide variety of periodical and broadcast outlets across the country and around the world. All told, Science Debate 2008 generated over 800 million media impressions and was credited with elevating the level of discourse. No matter which candidate one supported, this level of discussion is healthy, some might even say critical, for a 21st-century United States.

Alan Leshner, the CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and a member of the ScienceDebate2008 steering committee (as am I, as is Sheril), also has a letter in Issues responding to this article. Leshner notes some important science policy concerns that were not part of the ScienceDebate2008 list of 14 questions–notably, the considerable bureaucratic overhead that scientists face, and that prevents them from spending time on research.

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Politics, Politics and Science
NEW ON DISCOVER
OPEN
CITIZEN SCIENCE
ADVERTISEMENT

Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

ADVERTISEMENT

See More

ADVERTISEMENT
Collapse bottom bar
+

Login to your Account

X
E-mail address:
Password:
Remember me
Forgot your password?
No problem. Click here to have it e-mailed to you.

Not Registered Yet?

Register now for FREE. Registration only takes a few minutes to complete. Register now »