[lol] But what if God did it?
Sorry, Don, I couldn't resist. [tung]
LongeCityAdvocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans
Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.
3 votes
The War on Science
Started by
Lazarus Long
, Dec 06 2004 02:32 PM
50 replies to this topic
#32
-
- Guest
- 131 posts
- 0 ₮
- Location:Grantham, NH
Posted 10 September 2006 - 04:53 AM
Perhaps I didn't make myself clear, or what you are saying is proof of the arrogance. While the scientists may believe that there is no debate (an indication of dogmatism, being so convinced of your own opinions to refuse to debate others, sounds like someone who is religiously scientific...) but the public says otherwise.The problem is that the second someone of such stature engages in an evolution-ID "debate" the news is broadcast around the world as "proof" that there is a controversy. So, being the logical people that they are, most evolutionary biologists quickly realized that "swatting at the flies" does not serve logic's best interest.
The facts are that there is a debate in public so long as there are enough people insufficiently grounded in the process of science to disprove ID for themselves, uneducated enough to have an empty mind worth filling, while at the same time lectured by society that we all need to be "open minded" and "tolerant" (typically by those who are so convinced of their own superior knowledge that they refuse to engage others), that the public is ripe for exploitation.
If scientists were so convinced of their own correctness, they shouldn't be afraid to debate IDers. The fact that they refuse to is seen by the public as proof that they aren't so sure of themselves subconciously, are arrogant elitist snobs, and are afraid of the so-called 'truth' that IDers are spouting. The guilty flee.
#33
-
- Guest
- 2,350 posts
- 4 ₮
- Location:Rhode Island, USA
Posted 10 September 2006 - 12:05 PM
I do not fear debating IDers. I have done it and come to the conclusion that it is futile to argue with someone who is so rooted in belief that they will not pick up even an entry level science book to read what all scientific observations clearly point to. Those who believe in the scientific method are more than willing to read arguments that are pro ID though when ID starts the fall apart we're told to read the Bible. Go figure.
To have a debate, there has to be rules. A rational person will not engage in debate where there are none for one of the parties.
The "we're afraid" argument and resorting to name calling are weak and childish. This drivel does nothing to further the point you are trying to make but simply makes you look like a Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly goon.
To have a debate, there has to be rules. A rational person will not engage in debate where there are none for one of the parties.
The "we're afraid" argument and resorting to name calling are weak and childish. This drivel does nothing to further the point you are trying to make but simply makes you look like a Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly goon.
sponsored ad
-
- Advert
#34
-
- Guest
- 1,097 posts
- 154 ₮
- Location:US
Posted 03 October 2006 - 12:38 AM
To have a debate, there has to be rules. A rational person will not engage in debate where there are none for one of the parties
Yup, exactly. Whenever my mom and I get into it about these issues she always brings up the fact that someone could have "made up" those findings and that they are false... so someone couldn't have done the same for religion?
I find it hard to debate with someone who can stare at something straight out of the ground (e.g. a primitive skull or hip bone) and say that it is not true... what basis do you have to back up your claims? what... did god just put the friggin' bone in the ground to trick you? and if so... why would you want to worship a god who plays such childish games? I wouldn't, I have my own agenda...
#35
-
- Guest
- 2,491 posts
- -103 ₮
- Location:Atlanta, GA
Posted 03 October 2006 - 12:51 AM
It's strange, the creationist I debated with- once upon a time a long time ago- (over a blunt), was also biology major. I thought that was really strange because in my highschool biology experience we were given solid scientific evidence of all sorts and strengths blatantly establishing evolution by natural selection with little room for doubt (and not to mention that the entire underlying algorithm shows itself in many natural ways that could only be countered with an argument on the order of Descartes' decieving god. [tung] )imagine a young 23 year old creationist majoring in microbiology
#36
-
- Guest, F@H
- 183 posts
- -1 ₮
- Location:Chicago, IL.
Posted 10 November 2006 - 06:32 PM
Sorry for jumping in here, I haven't had time to read all the quotes. I just had a few comments.
The division of church of state was not intended to be one of the checks and balances in our government. It is a statement of an explicit principle in the US Constitution; the government has no authority no legislate on issues of morality.
The fundamental issue between science and religion is 'rationality vs. irrationality'. Unfortunalely, our government has a poor track record over the last ~60 years in terms of making rational policies and decisions. Rationality, as a principle, was never adopted by either political party, as the irrationality of altruism as a moral ideal has never been questioned.
Reason and science will flourish when we, as a culture, abandon altruism and adopt a rational moral ideal; ie. the primary rights of the individual. These primary rights, as enumerated by the constitition, include protection from government interference in the economy. It is only due to our bastardized 'mixed economy' that political groups are able to wield such powerful weapons as 'science'.
While I could have put this post in the religion forum as well because of the obvious political nature of theocratic versus secular struggle inherent in the division of Church and State...
The division of church of state was not intended to be one of the checks and balances in our government. It is a statement of an explicit principle in the US Constitution; the government has no authority no legislate on issues of morality.
The fundamental issue between science and religion is 'rationality vs. irrationality'. Unfortunalely, our government has a poor track record over the last ~60 years in terms of making rational policies and decisions. Rationality, as a principle, was never adopted by either political party, as the irrationality of altruism as a moral ideal has never been questioned.
Reason and science will flourish when we, as a culture, abandon altruism and adopt a rational moral ideal; ie. the primary rights of the individual. These primary rights, as enumerated by the constitition, include protection from government interference in the economy. It is only due to our bastardized 'mixed economy' that political groups are able to wield such powerful weapons as 'science'.
#41
-
- Guest
- 243 posts
- 1 ₮
- Location:Florida
Posted 16 November 2006 - 08:39 PM
Religion is to spiritual understanding, what technology is to science.
Technology takes what it needs from science to support the technology.
Religion takes from spiritual understanding what it needs to support the religion.
I would not say that the spiritual understanding of Jesus is in anyway adequately represented by either the ancient or modern Christian church. In fact they have incorporated a lot of garbage from the ancient Hebrew's backward ideas that it completely buries the good work that Jesus tried to do in a pool of very primitive ideas. Jesus was without a doubt a spiritual philosopher far ahead of his time.
Unfortunately Jesus is not around to speak on his own behalf so we have only the after thoughts of lesser minds from which to determine what he might have thought about the theory of evolution. He might have said that the story of Adam and Eve was a parable about the first humans to be aware of the divine in nature. We can only speculate on his behalf.
I for one am not religious. I am spiritual because there is something within me that drives me to believe that life has some magic in it. There is a creativity within me that can only come from some higher awareness that is trying to speak to my mind from a higher place of existence.
I am also not strictly a scientist. I have a lot of understanding of science and a lot more of technology but am strictly a life long student when it comes to science. In my opinion religion evolved from the stories that parents told their children to help them sleep at night. They answered the hard questions like why is the sky blue, and what happens to us when we die. These things could not be answered with anything like science back then and so these stories ultimately took on the form of religions and theologies.
Cosmology is of course the big question so it naturally evolved into the most elaborate stories. Religion has no chance when it comes to modern science in its ability to tell us how the universe came about. Religion can not answer how life came about without telling a fantastic story of God's word, and the 7 days.
To anyone who can reason and examine scientific evidence this is simply a fantastic story. To the true believer in the religion it is fact that can not be challenged with reason or alternate fact.
This takes nothing from the author of Creation. The great Architect who can make all of creation, and then remove all evidence of her existence can do anything she likes. [lol]
Perhaps science we will yet discover the trail of breadcrumbs that will lead us to her house.
Technology takes what it needs from science to support the technology.
Religion takes from spiritual understanding what it needs to support the religion.
I would not say that the spiritual understanding of Jesus is in anyway adequately represented by either the ancient or modern Christian church. In fact they have incorporated a lot of garbage from the ancient Hebrew's backward ideas that it completely buries the good work that Jesus tried to do in a pool of very primitive ideas. Jesus was without a doubt a spiritual philosopher far ahead of his time.
Unfortunately Jesus is not around to speak on his own behalf so we have only the after thoughts of lesser minds from which to determine what he might have thought about the theory of evolution. He might have said that the story of Adam and Eve was a parable about the first humans to be aware of the divine in nature. We can only speculate on his behalf.
I for one am not religious. I am spiritual because there is something within me that drives me to believe that life has some magic in it. There is a creativity within me that can only come from some higher awareness that is trying to speak to my mind from a higher place of existence.
I am also not strictly a scientist. I have a lot of understanding of science and a lot more of technology but am strictly a life long student when it comes to science. In my opinion religion evolved from the stories that parents told their children to help them sleep at night. They answered the hard questions like why is the sky blue, and what happens to us when we die. These things could not be answered with anything like science back then and so these stories ultimately took on the form of religions and theologies.
Cosmology is of course the big question so it naturally evolved into the most elaborate stories. Religion has no chance when it comes to modern science in its ability to tell us how the universe came about. Religion can not answer how life came about without telling a fantastic story of God's word, and the 7 days.
To anyone who can reason and examine scientific evidence this is simply a fantastic story. To the true believer in the religion it is fact that can not be challenged with reason or alternate fact.
This takes nothing from the author of Creation. The great Architect who can make all of creation, and then remove all evidence of her existence can do anything she likes. [lol]
Perhaps science we will yet discover the trail of breadcrumbs that will lead us to her house.
Edited by vortexentity, 24 November 2006 - 01:44 AM.
#42
-
- Guest
- 1,917 posts
- 8 ₮
Posted 16 November 2006 - 08:56 PM
This is a very good topic and highly on point for many of today's issues. I for one do not see science and technology as being very different, more like two areas on a continuum rather than opposites. I do see the distinction between pure science and applied technology but it seems more like theory vs practice.
The creationism thing doesn't bother me too much, let people believe what they want. Forcing school kids to study this theory takes time away from serious studies and should not be in schools. At most, it should be a few paragraphs in the book and not any sort of major theme. That way, no one can say it was totally ignored, it was mentioned and it's main points made. Kids are forced to go to school so no theology should be any part of the curriculum because that violates the separation of church and state. They can dryly mention what religions believe and move on, that's it.
Bush is a stupid man who panders to the right wing and the fundementalists in it. He is a politician first and formost and the wellbeing of the general public seems not be on his list of priorities at all. If religious fanatics want to send their own money to Israel to expand it's borders at the expense of other peoples, that is wrong but they have the right to do it. What makes me furious is when my tax dollars are sent over there for the same purpose. This has been going on for decades, long before Bush came along. I don't want to get into a big sidetrack but we have been subject to a huge con job perpetuated by the major media, by Israel, religionists and the politicians under the control of these groups. Hence the invasion of Iraq.
Science has been dumbed down and to this day children are harrased if they are interested in science. They are called nerds and ridiculed. Many adults seem to still hold these attitudes. It's no wonder the USA has fallen behind in pure science and research along with applied technology. We will not stay on top for long with religious nuts calling the shots. We may as well have Pat Robertson in the white house considering the actions our president has made.
I have noticed a trend in the media to downplay the benefits of vitamins and herbs. There have been studies made by special interest groups that found lack of benefits for certain vitamins and supplements and these have been trumpeted. Many of the studies were flawed and remind one of the so called "studies" funded by the tobacco industry that (surprise surprise) found tobacco wasn't so bad after all. Or the studies by polluting industries which found that global warming was a myth. The vast majority of studies showed the opposite but the media seems to take the position that there just isn't enough info to decide in many cases. Consolidation and corporate control of the media is behind a lot of this. That and cash money from pharmaceutical and other interests to influence so called science articles we see in our daily papers and on TV
Do not overlook the profit motive behind a lot of whats going on. It isn't just the religionists though they are the most visible. The administration was caught planting supposedly straight news articles in mainstream media that supported their positions. The reason they were caught is because they were clumsy. This has been going on for ages. If you believe everything you are told in the media you are extremely gullible. Doubt much of what you see and all of what you hear.
The creationism thing doesn't bother me too much, let people believe what they want. Forcing school kids to study this theory takes time away from serious studies and should not be in schools. At most, it should be a few paragraphs in the book and not any sort of major theme. That way, no one can say it was totally ignored, it was mentioned and it's main points made. Kids are forced to go to school so no theology should be any part of the curriculum because that violates the separation of church and state. They can dryly mention what religions believe and move on, that's it.
Bush is a stupid man who panders to the right wing and the fundementalists in it. He is a politician first and formost and the wellbeing of the general public seems not be on his list of priorities at all. If religious fanatics want to send their own money to Israel to expand it's borders at the expense of other peoples, that is wrong but they have the right to do it. What makes me furious is when my tax dollars are sent over there for the same purpose. This has been going on for decades, long before Bush came along. I don't want to get into a big sidetrack but we have been subject to a huge con job perpetuated by the major media, by Israel, religionists and the politicians under the control of these groups. Hence the invasion of Iraq.
Science has been dumbed down and to this day children are harrased if they are interested in science. They are called nerds and ridiculed. Many adults seem to still hold these attitudes. It's no wonder the USA has fallen behind in pure science and research along with applied technology. We will not stay on top for long with religious nuts calling the shots. We may as well have Pat Robertson in the white house considering the actions our president has made.
I have noticed a trend in the media to downplay the benefits of vitamins and herbs. There have been studies made by special interest groups that found lack of benefits for certain vitamins and supplements and these have been trumpeted. Many of the studies were flawed and remind one of the so called "studies" funded by the tobacco industry that (surprise surprise) found tobacco wasn't so bad after all. Or the studies by polluting industries which found that global warming was a myth. The vast majority of studies showed the opposite but the media seems to take the position that there just isn't enough info to decide in many cases. Consolidation and corporate control of the media is behind a lot of this. That and cash money from pharmaceutical and other interests to influence so called science articles we see in our daily papers and on TV
Do not overlook the profit motive behind a lot of whats going on. It isn't just the religionists though they are the most visible. The administration was caught planting supposedly straight news articles in mainstream media that supported their positions. The reason they were caught is because they were clumsy. This has been going on for ages. If you believe everything you are told in the media you are extremely gullible. Doubt much of what you see and all of what you hear.
#43
-
- Guest
- 1,000 posts
- 19 ₮
- Location:Belfast, Northern Ireland
Posted 16 November 2006 - 09:03 PM
Libertarian Socialism is the social system of the evolved mind.
Socialism is the social system of the truly uncomfortable who will always need to complain about "the system". Nine out of ten socialists whom I have met have mostly hoodies in their wardrobe.
#44
-
- Guest
- 243 posts
- 1 ₮
- Location:Florida
Posted 16 November 2006 - 10:11 PM
Obviously the "War of Science" as the book goes is one that is being waged by the Republicans for the sake of what they see as a
"War on Religion".
It is a kind of tit for tat from what I can gather. Science is driven in a large part by a very secular order of Scientist. While the majority of people in the United States are still religious and so they use the democracy of the system to keep the faith alive while the secular often represented by the Left are using the letter of the law, and the current trend of political correctness to erode the influence of religion in the public eye.
It is a war that is being waged right in front of everyone but it seems to get very little coherent coverage in the press.
It is interesting to note that it is a very new phenomena as the Left/Secular scientist, and the Right/Religious politicians are at odds with one another and the fight seems to be one of great drama to no one but them.
"War on Religion".
It is a kind of tit for tat from what I can gather. Science is driven in a large part by a very secular order of Scientist. While the majority of people in the United States are still religious and so they use the democracy of the system to keep the faith alive while the secular often represented by the Left are using the letter of the law, and the current trend of political correctness to erode the influence of religion in the public eye.
It is a war that is being waged right in front of everyone but it seems to get very little coherent coverage in the press.
It is interesting to note that it is a very new phenomena as the Left/Secular scientist, and the Right/Religious politicians are at odds with one another and the fight seems to be one of great drama to no one but them.
#45
- Topic Starter
-
- Life Member, Guardian
- 8,116 posts
- 242 ₮
- Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York
- ✔
Posted 16 January 2008 - 12:41 AM
In an update on the war on science report here is the latest report from the National Science Boards on the looming threat to science in the US.
U.S. Dominance in Science at Risk, Report Says
By CORNELIA DEAN
Published: January 16, 2008
NY Times
The United States remains the world leader in scientific and technological innovation, but its dominance is threatened by economic development elsewhere, particularly in Asia, the National Science Board said on Tuesday in its biennial report on science and engineering. The country’s position is especially delicate, the agency said, given its reliance on foreign-born workers to fill technical jobs.
The board is the oversight agency for the National Science Foundation, the nation’s leading source of funds for basic research in the physical sciences.
The report, available at www.nsf.gov/statistics/indicators , recommends increased financing for basic research and greater “intellectual interchange” between researchers in academia and industry. The board also called for better efforts to track the globalization of manufacturing and services in the high-tech sector, and their implications for the American economy.
Over all, it said, surveys of science and mathematics education are both “disappointing and encouraging.” Fourth- and eighth-grade students in all ethnic groups showed improvement in math, the report said, but progress in science is far less robust. And knowledge gaps persist between demographic groups, with European- and Asian-Americans scoring higher than students from other groups.
Many Americans remain ignorant about much of science, the board said; for example, many are unable to answer correctly when asked if the Earth moves around the Sun (it does). But they are not noticeably more ignorant than people in other developed countries except on two subjects: evolution and the Big Bang. Although these ideas are organizing principles underlying modern biology and physics, many Americans do not accept them.
“These differences probably indicate that many Americans hold religious beliefs that cause them to be skeptical of established scientific ideas,” the report said, “even when they have some basic familiarity with those ideas.”
Science and Engineering Indicators (National Science Board)
U.S. Dominance in Science at Risk, Report Says
By CORNELIA DEAN
Published: January 16, 2008
NY Times
The United States remains the world leader in scientific and technological innovation, but its dominance is threatened by economic development elsewhere, particularly in Asia, the National Science Board said on Tuesday in its biennial report on science and engineering. The country’s position is especially delicate, the agency said, given its reliance on foreign-born workers to fill technical jobs.
The board is the oversight agency for the National Science Foundation, the nation’s leading source of funds for basic research in the physical sciences.
The report, available at www.nsf.gov/statistics/indicators , recommends increased financing for basic research and greater “intellectual interchange” between researchers in academia and industry. The board also called for better efforts to track the globalization of manufacturing and services in the high-tech sector, and their implications for the American economy.
Over all, it said, surveys of science and mathematics education are both “disappointing and encouraging.” Fourth- and eighth-grade students in all ethnic groups showed improvement in math, the report said, but progress in science is far less robust. And knowledge gaps persist between demographic groups, with European- and Asian-Americans scoring higher than students from other groups.
Many Americans remain ignorant about much of science, the board said; for example, many are unable to answer correctly when asked if the Earth moves around the Sun (it does). But they are not noticeably more ignorant than people in other developed countries except on two subjects: evolution and the Big Bang. Although these ideas are organizing principles underlying modern biology and physics, many Americans do not accept them.
“These differences probably indicate that many Americans hold religious beliefs that cause them to be skeptical of established scientific ideas,” the report said, “even when they have some basic familiarity with those ideas.”
Science and Engineering Indicators (National Science Board)
#46
-
- Guest
- 46 posts
- 0 ₮
Posted 12 February 2008 - 08:55 AM
LOL! All that? What have you guys derived out of all those reports, demographics, studies, and surveys?
Science is progressive. Its a river flowing downhill. Politics, society, or human's fear of change may dam the flow from time to time but it still rolls on.
There can't be a war on science. That is stupid. A millenia ago, it was possible to damn the flow in order to try to maintain control but it didn't work so hot, did it? When the damn broke, the waters flowed right into the industrial revolution with an overwhelming vehemenence.
A government may not want a science to be researched. You think that will stop it? In 1810 (or thereabouts), Lord Cochrane came up with a wonderful idea of seperating...a certain chemical from another chemical by a double bulkhead filled with gunpowder. Filling the hold of a fireship, it could be sailed into a french port when the wind was blowing in the right direction. Fireships were not uncommon in this era and were used to destroy gunships in port. This was different. When the bulkhead blew, the two chemicals would mix and a cloud of primeval mustard gas would be bourn upon the wind. This did not only destroy the shipping in the harbor but the residents in the town as well as the outlying farms downwind. It was so fearsome and effective the Admiralty buried the entire project...they were afraid Boney (no moral icon himself) would not hesitate to use it too, once he figured out the secret.
One hundred years later, the exact same formula was being released over the trenches in WWI.
The fact remains. War breeds science. Antimatter energy will be released as a bomb decades before the first AM engine is used. Nearly every technology (the practical application of science) is born from war. War is our single worst feature as humans and yet remains the springboard for discovering the art of god within ourselves. It is our best feature...
Odd, huh?
Science is progressive. Its a river flowing downhill. Politics, society, or human's fear of change may dam the flow from time to time but it still rolls on.
There can't be a war on science. That is stupid. A millenia ago, it was possible to damn the flow in order to try to maintain control but it didn't work so hot, did it? When the damn broke, the waters flowed right into the industrial revolution with an overwhelming vehemenence.
A government may not want a science to be researched. You think that will stop it? In 1810 (or thereabouts), Lord Cochrane came up with a wonderful idea of seperating...a certain chemical from another chemical by a double bulkhead filled with gunpowder. Filling the hold of a fireship, it could be sailed into a french port when the wind was blowing in the right direction. Fireships were not uncommon in this era and were used to destroy gunships in port. This was different. When the bulkhead blew, the two chemicals would mix and a cloud of primeval mustard gas would be bourn upon the wind. This did not only destroy the shipping in the harbor but the residents in the town as well as the outlying farms downwind. It was so fearsome and effective the Admiralty buried the entire project...they were afraid Boney (no moral icon himself) would not hesitate to use it too, once he figured out the secret.
One hundred years later, the exact same formula was being released over the trenches in WWI.
The fact remains. War breeds science. Antimatter energy will be released as a bomb decades before the first AM engine is used. Nearly every technology (the practical application of science) is born from war. War is our single worst feature as humans and yet remains the springboard for discovering the art of god within ourselves. It is our best feature...
Odd, huh?
#47
-
- Guest, F@H
- 1,755 posts
- 2 ₮
- Location:Thessaloniki, Greece
Posted 24 March 2008 - 03:52 AM
wow Greece beat the US ... and to think Greece is the most religious country in the EUHere is a story on how evolution is accepted less in America than other western countries.
Look at the blue line, and look at some of the countries we are under!
#48
-
- Guest
- 46 posts
- 0 ₮
Posted 19 April 2008 - 11:39 AM
I call bullshit on that one.
Just because some biased group of blowhards says its true does not make it true.
I can find 10,000 "studies" on the internet saying otherwise. Complete with fancy graphs too.
Wow. Wild idea. Why not think for yourself? Hey?
Ever been to Greece? Ever asked a grecian about the RNA helix encoding the female line in the mitochondria?
Just because some biased group of blowhards says its true does not make it true.
I can find 10,000 "studies" on the internet saying otherwise. Complete with fancy graphs too.
Wow. Wild idea. Why not think for yourself? Hey?
Ever been to Greece? Ever asked a grecian about the RNA helix encoding the female line in the mitochondria?
#49
-
- Guest
- 16,276 posts
- 2,000 ₮
- Location:Philadelphia
Posted 20 April 2008 - 06:04 AM
Ganshauk, you're going to have to do better than just declare the above study to be "bullshit". What's your evidence that it was done by a "biased group of blowhards"? You can find "10,000" studies "on the internet" saying what, that Americans overwhelmingly accept the theory of evolution? I call bullshit on your bullshit.I call bullshit on that one.
Just because some biased group of blowhards says its true does not make it true.
I can find 10,000 "studies" on the internet saying otherwise. Complete with fancy graphs too.
Wow. Wild idea. Why not think for yourself? Hey?
Ever been to Greece? Ever asked a grecian about the RNA helix encoding the female line in the mitochondria?
#50
-
- Guest, F@H
- 1,755 posts
- 2 ₮
- Location:Thessaloniki, Greece
Posted 20 April 2008 - 06:36 AM
I agree with Niner, I call BS on your BS. Because I've LIVED in Greece! People in Greece may be religious, but they're certainly not dumb enough to accept creationism.I call bullshit on that one.
Just because some biased group of blowhards says its true does not make it true.
I can find 10,000 "studies" on the internet saying otherwise. Complete with fancy graphs too.
Wow. Wild idea. Why not think for yourself? Hey?
Ever been to Greece? Ever asked a grecian about the RNA helix encoding the female line in the mitochondria?
Being a dual citizen, I can see first hand how the public in the US is so passionate about creationism vs Europe. Most Europeans barely even acknowledge the bible, let alone take it literally.
The public in the US is exactly as George Carlin said: It's garbage in, garbage out.
#51
-
- Guest
- 837 posts
- 142 ₮
- Location:Monteagle, TN
Posted 06 March 2009 - 11:02 AM
That Bush repressed science and technology is probably the sole reason that many technological breakthroughs predicted by 2009 have been delayed.
So, curious as to the takes on how this will change now that a change in presidents has occured? Do you believe Obama will reverse some of the anti-science measures inacted by the Bush administration?
So, curious as to the takes on how this will change now that a change in presidents has occured? Do you believe Obama will reverse some of the anti-science measures inacted by the Bush administration?
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
