We’re the geek vote?

I did not bite the head off that chicken.

Popular Mechanics has sorted through the various presidential candidates web sites for information on their stance on various science-relevant issues (and on gun control…how that ended up in their matrix is a mystery, and I presume there is just some gun fanatic on their staff). They have produced a
table listing various science issues for each candidate with check marks indicating whether they have declared anything on the subject. You can’t get their positions from the table — a check just means there is more information available — and you have to click through each to figure out what they’re saying.

Right away you’ll notice that pretty much everyone is ignoring space technology (sorry, Phil). The Republicans have little interest in science education, and when you click through, they’re usually just mouthing platitudes, like “encourage students to pursue science careers”. The Democrats are much, much better — they make more points and offer some specifics. Clinton wants to restore the OTA and improve the science advisor’s access, as does Edwards; Edwards also want to increase NIH and NSF funding and remove research restrictions, and invest more in teacher training and pay. Obama wants to double research funding. Richardson wants to hire and train 100,000 new math and science teachers.

Anyway, it’s a useful guide to what the politicians say they want to do, and gives a peek into their priorities. It looks like if you’re pro-science, you ought to be a Democrat; if you’re pro-gun, you need to vote Republican, or for John Edwards.

What would Admiral Ackbar say?

Steve King (Rotten-Iowa) has our house of representatives pondering a resolution that states that Christmas is peachy-keen…and that also contains implicit assumptions that the US is a Christian nation. It’s very devious: under the cover of empty, feel-good fluff, it advances right-wing religious talking points. It’s sneaky. It’s underhanded. It’s dishonest. It’s so Christian.

Let’s have a presidential science debate!

As Sheril hinted earlier, there is now a formal call for a science debate by the presidential candidates.

sciencedebate2008.jpg

A CALL FOR A PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Given the many urgent scientific and technological challenges facing America and the rest of the world, the increasing need for accurate scientific information in political decision making, and the vital role scientific innovation plays in spurring economic growth and competitiveness, we, the undersigned, call for a public debate in which the U.S. presidential candidates share their views on the issues of The Environment, Medicine and Health, and Science and Technology Policy.

I’ve expressed my opinion of such an effort before — I think it’s an excellent idea, but suspect that most of the candidates would refuse to submit to it. Not only is there the science test factor, in which we’re asking them to get evaluated on something most know nothing about, but the Republican slate in particular is full of astonishing idiots who hold beliefs contradicted by science. I just can’t believe they’ll step up on the podium for this one, unless they perhaps see an opportunity to hijack the discussion to promote their personal piety.

I still want it to happen: this is an opportunity to apply pressure to our candidates to have some minimal, basic science literacy. As I previously mentioned, though, those airheads with nice hairdos that populate the television media are even more dim than the candidates themselves, and must not be allowed anywhere near the event — I want wildlife biologists armed with tranquilizer guns at the doors, with orders to shoot Russert and Blitzer and anyone from Fox News on sight. How about if we put Natalie Angier, Carl Zimmer, John Horgan, Ira Flatow, John Tierney, and Cornelia Dean on a panel asking questions? How about if we ask Science and Nature to send representatives with questions? I would dearly love to see a debate on any subject where the candidates had to deal with issues of some substance.

So let’s all make a noise about this one, OK? Rattle the cages, and tell the candidates we want to hear opinions on topics that matter for the leader of a technological, 21st century society, rather than the usual tripe.

Sneaky College Christianists

American River College has, as most colleges do, a student body organization that is elected by the students. They recently had their elections, and got a bit of a surprise: the right-wing Christian group had organized, appealed to the student on the basis of their shared religious beliefs, and swept the election. It also helped that they could call on ethnic identities — Sacramento apparently has had an influx of Slavic immigrants with an odd(er) and often rather nasty form of the Christian cult. These are the Slavic Christian groups that are hysterically homophobic—it’s evident on their club forum, too.

EVERYWHERE I LOOK, ON TV IN SCHOOL EVERYWHERE BUT IN CHURCH ALL I SEE IS GAY THIS, GAY RIGHTS THAT OPEN DISPLAYS OF THIER LIFESTYLE BEING PUSHED DOWN OUR THROATS, I KNOW THAT JESUS LOVES THE SINNER BUT HATES THE SIN, IT JUST APEARS THAT, THAT SIN IS BEING THRUST UPON US IS THERE NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE, IS THIS WHAT WE HAVE TO LOOK FORWARD TO, SODOMITES RUNNING AROUND, OPENLY PROMOTING THIER LIFESTYLE, GAY MARRIAGE, GAY PASTORS, GAY CHURCHES, ITS LIKE GETTING OUT OF CONTROL, AND ITS VERY SAD TO SEE THIS DAY COME TO LIGHT, AND THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT.
THATS THE SADDEST THING EVER

They also seem to have a deep-rooted aversion to the period. And isn’t that just the cutest little example of suppressed homosexuality ever? All the pushing down throats and thrusting, and the poor little ranter is just so helpless.

Anyway, they organized and they got elected, which is fair enough. It’s still worrisome that people can be so easily manipulated by a candidate who is clearly batshit insane, but just the religious testimonial is enough to sway them. It’s what I dread about American elections in general: they are dominated by looney appeals to religious nonsense, and rational choice does not seem to come into it.

Of course, the fortunate thing about this petty coup is that, well, student organizations have some power to manage internal affairs, but don’t really have much say in the larger picture of running the college. This sentiment is absurdly impractical:

The other former member club member elected to the Student Association, Dennis Choban, listed his goals on his Student Association application form. They included “removing humanistic bias from certain courses (such as evolution science), and encouraging live discussion of nontraditional views in all classes.”

Student group leaders know that what is involved is largely sitting in meetings and managing paperwork that gets financial support from the administration flowing to campus organizations. If they go into this expecting to be able to purge gays, liberals, and evilutionists from the faculty, boy, are they ever going to be disappointed. And then there’ll be the laughing in their faces and the wasted effort and the growing sense of futility. But who knows, they seem to be repressed bottoms, they might like it.

Student Post: Dear PZ,

We, the students of BIOL 4003: Neurobiology have a proposal. We will clean your lab for extra credit. Think about it. That tank with the yellow stagnant water and other unidentifiable bits of matter? GONE. Those countless bottles of fruit fly carcasses? Sparkling clean and ready for next semester’s genetics class. We would also consider not having a final test an acceptable trade.

Respectfully awaiting your reply,
The Students

Why don’t their heads asplode?

There is a certain creationist book that contains this infamous quote:

No matter what ideology they may espouse, those who perpetrate terror over the world are, in reality, Darwinists. Darwinism is the only philosophy that places a value on-and thus encourages-conflict.

Kind of a common sentiment on the far right, I know. But you’d think a member of the far right would be reluctant to use it, because it’s from an Islamic crackpot, Adnan Oktar AKA Haryun Yahya, in his massive plagiarized tome, The Atlas of Creation.

Yet this book is prominently displayed in the waiting room of Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez. I’m wondering why GW Bush’s CIA and FBI aren’t all over this guy for endorsing the work of a radical Islamic nutcase. I’m wondering how a Bush appointee can parade a book with Arabic script on the cover without getting at least a strange look from his fellow travelers in peculiar politics. I don’t know how they can handle the conflict.

They must have really thick skulls.