The Union of Concerned Scientists is very concerned about politics!
The Union of Concerned Scientists say that they're worried about the political pressure that is undermining scientific research. According to a new report from that group, scientists in all of our governmental agencies feel that political interests get in the way of their research.
One of the study's authors wrote, “Many scientists told us that scientific decisions were being swayed by politics or that political influence inhibited their ability to carry out agency missions.”
That means that agencies like the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have to balance the political ideology of their bosses and colleagues with the need to protect the public from bad food or deadly diseases.
Those are jobs far too important to be impacted by political pressure. The report suggests that more training may help reduce the political influence, and more transparency could help scientists keep politics out of their findings.
These functions are far too important to be swayed by ideology, and scientists shouldn't have to consider the political environment just to do their jobs.
Wondering what kind of scientist allows his integrity to be compromised?
Particularly by blasted politicians
Am told by a friend at Sandia National labs that the politics of
competing for research money is ruthless.
So much for all scientists as noble seekers of truth.
Imagine what goes on in institutions with less funding.
What may be helpful is to search Mother Jones for "Burrowing In." It may explain ongoing perplexing screw-ups in O'B's tenure. e.g., conflicting/after-the-fact press releases by many depts (esp EPA, FDA. FCC. . .) The Secret Service embarrassment in Columbia several yrs back comes to mind. I believe those yahoos were inhrited by O'bama. Anyway, "just sayin." Look it up.
@cccccttttt, Chryslers' former CEO Lee Iacocca dedicated a chapter in his 2008 book "Where have all the leaders gone ?" to this issue ! His late wife had contracted the worst form of Diabetes and he, along with some of his well to do friends, established a research group to find a cure. Within a few years the prestigious woman doctor they chose to head the project developed a promising cure and that fact was announced to the public. In Mr. Iacocca's words, the atmosphere of mutual respect that existed between the various competing research groups quickly came to an end as the gloves came off and a battle ensued when the future flow of research grant money was threatened.
The two video presentations that are currently available, that challenge the authenticity of the Climate Change debate, make this same point as actual researchers in this field point out the fact that research funding is now systematically denied to those scientists who fail to include a link in their research that supports the Climate Change agenda !
Thom keeps talking about evolution as if it has goals. It doesn't, any more than gravity tries to form orbits. An orbit is the result of what happens moment by moment, but we see a pattern in it. Likewise, the differentiation of species and the demise of some along the way is not chosen (except maybe by us at this point), it's the result of random occurrences and momentum of action.
The best concise definition of evolution that I've ever read is this: Evolution is the non-random selection of randomly varying traits.