|
|
|
|
the_ignored
SFN Addict
2562 Posts |
 Posted - 12/27/2007 : 23:28:44
|
Could it actually be possible that there may be a science debate in 2008? One can only hope, but at least some people are working to bring it about.
This is from the original press release.
NEW YORK - A Republican and a Democratic member of the United States Congress, who are each also scientists, are leading an effort to push for a presidential debate on science and technology policy.
Congressman Vern Ehlers, R-MI, and congressman Rush Holt, D-NJ, have agreed to co-chair the non-partisan initiative, called ScienceDebate2008.com, whose signers also include fourteen Nobel laureates, several university presidents, other congresspersons of both parties, the president of the Academy of Evangelical Scientists and Ethicists, and the heads of several of America's major science organizations, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
"Advancing science and technology lie at the center of a very large number of the policy issues facing our nation and the world - issues that profoundly affect our national and economic security as science and technology continue to transform our lives," the two said in a joint statement. "No matter one's political stripe, these issues pose some of the most important pragmatic policy challenges the next president will face."
"We believe a debate on these issues would be the ideal opportunity for America and the candidates to explore our national priorities for the twenty-first century, and we hope candidates will wish to be involved in such a discussion," they said. |
Although at least one guy has understandable reservations:
| If the debate revolved around the parties' and candidates' different approaches to address agreed-upon problems, then a debate might be useful (or at least harmless). But if there is no agreement on the problems or challenges, or for that matter, the fundamental nature of scientific reality, how the hell do we have a useful debate? Worse, it just serves as a platform for anti-science ignorance and propaganda. And if believe that reason and logic will necessarily prevail, and the anti-science lunatics will be exposed for what they are, I have a cache of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to sell you. |
So, if they pull this off, any idea how the candidates will do? Do you think Mike's fears are justified? I suspect that he's more right than not, in this case.
|
>From: enuffenuff@fastmail.fm
(excerpt follows):
> I'm looking to teach these two bastards a lesson they'll never forget.
> Personal visit by mates of mine. No violence, just a wee little chat.
>
> **** has also committed more crimes than you can count with his
> incitement of hatred against a religion. That law came in about 2007
> much to ****'s ignorance. That is fact and his writing will become well
> know as well as him becoming a publicly known icon of hatred.
>
> Good luck with that fuckwit. And Reynold, fucking run, and don't stop.
> Disappear would be best as it was you who dared to attack me on my
> illness knowing nothing of the cause. You disgust me and you are top of
> the list boy. Again, no violence. Just regular reminders of who's there
> and visits to see you are behaving. Nothing scary in reality. But I'd
> still disappear if I was you.
What brought that on? this. Original posting here.
Another example of this guy's lunacy here. |
Edited by - the_ignored on 12/27/2007 23:35:39
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 12/28/2007 : 00:01:26 [Permalink]
|
I don't think it will happen.
Such a debate format would only be useful, I think, before primary elections.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Science debate for 2008?
