Who’s against reforming health care? Who’s against reforming education? Who’s against energy independence? These are the foundations of Obama’s policies. Why doesn’t everyone support his presidency? It is because many people do not agree with how Obama wants to solve these problems. Remember Obama’s little line in his inaugural address; “We are going to restore science to its rightful place.” Anyone trying to hold science down must be quite ignorant, right? However, as with anything Obama says we must ask, “What does Obama really mean?” “Anyone against science must be ignorant,” says your standard media template. I ask, “What science and by what do you define as science?” Is it science that we are restoring, or selecting ideas in science that support your political point of view?
For example, one of the first acts of our new President was to repeal Bush’s ban on embryonic stem cell research. Wait, Bush didn’t ban embryonic stem cell research, he forbid executive funding of stem cell research. The issue presented a moral dilemma at the time, Bush side stepped the issue by refusing government funding, but left the playing field open for private funding. The conservatives cheered and the liberal left was livid because the conservatives were happy. “George Bush is ignorant and holding back science,” the liberals argued. Obama’s removal of this ban was a master stroke for the liberals. Finally, embryonic stem cell research can be restored to its rightful place. Thanks to Obama, any new government spending on embryonic stem cell research falls into the category of most Obama spending, wasteful (ok, investing for you libs). That’s because the “science” on embryonic stem cell research was already settled. It does not work. Doctors cannot stop embryonic stem cells from turning into cancer and so the science is useless. Below is a video of Dr. Oz explaining this position on Opra.
In removing the ban, he was not restoring science, but propping up old, disproven theories that appealed to his political world view. Is Obama truly the person to be judging what science needs to be restored?
I say let the science speak for itself. If it has merit, it will prevail.
I am a science skeptic. That doesn’t mean I believe science is a bunch of lies. To me, it means that I don’t jump on the bandwagon of belief every time the media decides to publicize a new popular scientific theory. The reason is because science is rarely settled in a brand new theory or discovery. In fact, it takes years of testing and study before you can realistically close the book on a scientific discovery.
When I was a child, my favorite dinosaur was the brontosaurus. I liked that it didn’t scare the crap out of me and it was supposed to be the biggest of all dinosaurs. Do you remember this dinosaur? The brontosaurus does not exist. The head of one dinosaur was mistakenly placed on the body of another dinosaur. This is one of many examples of science making a mistake.
Scientists are also human beings. Despite one of the tenants of science being objectivity, it is impossible for humans and all humans to be objective. There are at least a dozen of proven frauds in the science of evolution (example only. I’m not arguing one way or another on evolution). For example, Piltdown man found in England in 1912, proved to be a modern human that had been stained to look aged and had the teeth filled down. These things do happen. Objectivity is also threatened by other factors such as funding, job security, and the location you received your education.
I believe that science does need to be restored, but not by picking one theory to win over another because of political expedience. Instead, let’s have the science speak for itself. I plan on doing a few posts on global warming in the days to come. My intention is not to refute or promote it, but to deal with serious issues facing the science, which are not being discussed or revealed to the general public. I know that global warming is not the topic of political debate at the moment, but as Obama looks to cap and trade and ideas to help solve our energy dependence, it is important to deal with the science Obama is trying to restore.