Science Left Behind: Rise of the Anti-Scientific Left
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Science Left Behind: Oct. 10, 2012 Rise of the Anti-Scientific Left Alex B. Berezow, Ph.D. Editor, RealClearScience.com “So, Who Are You?” • From southern Illinois • 2004: Univ. of Washington – Go Huskies!!! • 2010: Ph.D. in microbiology • 2010: Editor, RealClearScience My Personal Science Philosophy • If you’re not an expert, it is best to accept mainstream science • Science should always come before politics • No ideology (or political party) is beyond criticism • We should purge anti-scientific thinking, even if it comes from our political allies • I play for Team Science, not Team Blue or Team Red Why “Science Left Behind”? • Why pick on the Left? • Media is quick to cover anti- scientific beliefs from conservatives • Several books already published covering the topic • Progressive anti-science beliefs are underreported, yet just as dangerous Who Are “Progressives”? An adaptation of David Nolan’s chart Myths Commonly Held by Today’s Progressives 1. Natural things are good. 2. Unnatural things are bad. 3. Unchecked science will destroy us. 4. Science is only relative, anyway. 5. Science is on our side. What are the results of these myths? Protests against basic science. (Lots of protests…) Basic Technology Opposed Scientific Research Opposed Energy Production Opposed Let’s Review… • Progressive protesters don’t want: – Vaccines – “Chemicals” – Genetically modified crops – Research into genetically modified crops – Animal research – Gender-based biology research – Nuclear power – Fracking or natural gas – Wind power – Hydroelectric power • Can someone be opposed to all that, yet still be “pro-science”? • How exactly do progressives think of scientists…? Like This? Objection, Your Honor! • Progressive activists are silly • Progressive politicians are pro- science! • Are they really? Credit: Photobucket President Barack Obama “We’ll restore science to its rightful place…” --Inaugural Address, January 20, 2009 That’s a lofty goal for a politician. How did he do? Barack Obama vs. Embryonic Stem Cells • Remember when GW Bush banned embryonic stem cells? – Well, he didn’t – He limited federal funding to pre-existing cell lines – 21 ESC lines were eligible for funding in 2001 • Obama promised to fix this – Executive order issued March 9, 2009 – What did it do? Barack Obama vs. Embryonic Stem Cells • Lifted the “ban” on federal funding – Today, 178 ESC lines – But, ~760 lines available globally • Must be derived from “leftover” IVF embryos Permission from donors required • So, it does little to address the hundreds of thousands of embryos sitting unused in freezers all over the country Barack Obama vs. Embryonic Stem Cells • What is still not eligible for federal funding? – Creation of embryos only for research purposes – Derivation of hESCs from SCNT – Injection of hESCs into non- human primate blastocysts • Many bioethical issues at play • Bottom line: Obama’s policy is not revolutionary; it is a marginal improvement Barack Obama vs. Vaccines We’ve seen just a skyrocketing autism rate. Some people are suspicious that it’s connected to the vaccines. This person included. The science right now is inconclusive, but we have to research it. --Candidate Barack Obama, April 21, 2008 • Wrong • Science was “settled” in 2002 (if not earlier) – Vaccine-autism link declared a fraud (2011) • Did things improve when he became President? Barack Obama vs. Vaccines • 2009: H1N1 influenza pandemic – Vaccine shortage in U.S. • Why? • Overly cautious FDA – Adjuvants in H1N1 vaccine are not allowed in the U.S. (but they are used elsewhere) – Switch from multi-dose to single-dose vials because they have less thimerosal Barack Obama vs. Vaccines • Outcome of 2009 H1N1 influenza: – 61 million Americans infected – 274,000 hospitalizations – 12,470 deaths • How many of these illnesses and deaths might have been prevented if FDA had better policies? Sidebar: President George W. Bush • Regularly accused of manipulating scientific data… often by Barack Obama “[Promoting science]… is about ensuring that scientific data is never distorted or concealed to serve a political agenda – and that we make scientific decisions based on facts, not ideology.” --President Barack Obama, March 9, 2009 Barack Obama vs. BP Oil Spill • April 2010: BP oil spill • One of the worst oil spills in world history • How did the Obama Administration respond? Barack Obama vs. BP Oil Spill Taken together, two of the reports paint a picture of a government that was as unprepared to deal with a catastrophic spill as BP. And the portrait of an administration that withheld information from the public and, more specifically, scientists, about how much oil was getting into the water, how much remained and how such estimates were calculated appeared to contradict Obama's pledge to make government more transparent and trustworthy. --Los Angeles Times, October 6, 2010 Barack Obama vs. Environment • The Good: – Eliminated corn ethanol subsidy • Nitrous oxide – New limits on carbon emissions from coal power plants • The Bad: – No comprehensive climate change legislation • Many Democrats opposed • E.g. Joe Manchin – Has not waived ethanol mandate for fuel • Causes high food prices Barack Obama vs. Environment • The Ugly: • “Cash for Clunkers” – New cars were 0.23 mpg more efficient (than if program didn’t exist) – Saved US 12,000 barrels of oil per day (but we use 9 million barrels) – Short-term boost in sales, but no long- term economic benefit – Taxpayer cost: $24,000 per car • Ignored EPA’s recommendation for smog levels – Reason: It would be bad for business – Isn’t that what he criticized for Bush for doing? Barack Obama vs. Nuclear Waste • Yucca Mountain – Political football for years – Studied for 25 years – Facility already built – Cost: $13.5 billion – Safer to store waste here than scattered around the country • NRC Chair Gregory Jaczko – Former aide to anti-Yucca Sen. Harry Reid – Withheld information from his colleagues on NRC Barack Obama vs. Nuclear Waste “The U.S.’s top nuclear-power regulator ‘strategically’ withheld information from his colleagues in an effort to stop work on a controversial proposed waste dump, according to a report by the agency’s internal watchdog…” --Wall St. Journal, June 10, 2011 • Obama essentially cancelled Yucca Mountain merely 4 months after taking office • Now what? Barack Obama vs. Solar Power • Obama says he wants to promote green energy • Bad Policy #1: Playing “venture capitalist” with taxpayer money – Solyndra • Made “CIGS” panels • Copper indium gallium diselenide • Expensive, more efficient – Business model: • Price of silicon will go up • Solyndra can compete w/ “thin- film” silicon panels from China – But, price of silicon came crashing down… • Along w/ Solyndra Bankrupt Barack Obama vs. Solar Power “…Obama’s green-technology program was infused with politics at every level, The Washington Post found in an analysis of thousands of memos, company records and internal e-mails. Political considerations were raised repeatedly by company investors, Energy Department bureaucrats and White House officials. “…when warned that financial disaster might lie ahead, the administration remained steadfast in its support for Solyndra.” “…[The documents] give an unprecedented glimpse into high-level maneuvering by politically connected clean-technology investors. --Washington Post, December 25, 2011 Barack Obama vs. Solar Power • Bad Policy #2: Obama slapped a 31% tariff on cheap solar panels from China – This will increase the cost of solar panel installations for your home • If you can’t beat ‘em, tax ‘em! Is President Obama “Pro-Science”? Did Barack Obama “restore science to its rightful place”? Or… Is he just another politician? Progressive Cities of the Left Coast • Seattle • Portland • San Francisco • Are they bastions of good science policy? Silliness in Seattle: “Snowmageddon” • December 2008: Snow! – Heaven forbid, don’t use salt! • It’s bad for Puget Sound (???) – Instead: Pack snow down and use 9,000 tons of sand • Dirty ice rinks w/ “ice potholes” • This is actually worse for environment • How did that work out? – Police couldn’t patrol the city – Schools, businesses cancelled – Greg Nickels lost his job • Surprise! Now we use salt! Silliness in Seattle: Plastic Bag Ban • Does little to nothing to help environment – Animals don’t usually choke on plastic bags – Lost fishing nets used at sea are a much bigger problem • Plastic bags are energy- efficient – Must use a cotton bag 173 times to “break even” from energy standpoint Keep Portland Weird (Note: That Shouldn’t Be a Problem) • Water fluoridation – 1945: Grand Rapids, MI – Helps prevent tooth decay – Benefits the poor – 200 million Americans get fluoridated water • Portland – Rejected fluoridation in 1980 – Oregon ranks near bottom in children’s dental health “Many Portlanders treasure their city’s quirky distinctiveness.” --New York Times, Sept. 12, 2012 Keep Portland Weird (and Toothless?) “It isn’t just time for Portland to enter the 21st century — we have some business to make up from the 20th century,” said Randy Leonard, the public safety commissioner, who was interrupted several times by shouts from the audience. “This is not an issue for the faint of heart.” --New York Times, Sept. 12, 2012 • Last week, city council approved fluoridation… in 2014 • Welcome to the 20th Century? “If You’re Going to San Francisco…” • Be sure to bring a plunger • Low-flow toilets are causing sludge to back up in city sewers – Mission Bay neighborhood smells like “rotten eggs” • Spent $14 million to dump