Real Clear Politics / Real Clear Science
May 6, 2013
Will Science Journalists Ever Confront Democrats?
By _Alex B. Berezow_
(http://www.realclearscience.com/authors/?author=Alex+B.+Berezow&id=21487)
Slate’s Bad Astronomer, Phil Plait, doesn’t shy away from a good rant
every now and then, often focusing his wrath on scientifically clueless
politicians. I admit to doing the same. In his _latest diatribe_
(http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2013/05/01/attacks_on_science_government_antiscienc
e_on_the_rise.html) , Plait pointedly asks, “What the hell is going on with
my government?”
But, strangely, by “government” he apparently means “Republican Party.”
As I detailed in my recent book, _Science Left Behind_
(http://www.amazon.com/dp/1610391640) , the media’s eagerness to criticize
unscientific
conservatives is surpassed only by its timidity in the face of equivalent
misdeeds
from progressives. I exposed some of the left’s anti-science beliefs
because, quite frankly, few others in science journalism seemed willing to do
so.
Any dispassionate analysis of the goings-on in Washington would conclude
that it is plagued by dysfunction. Only a partisan zealot would blame just
one side but not the other. Is it really necessary to point out to
journalists that, while the Republicans control the House, the Democrats
control the
Senate and Presidency? In times like these, when D.C. is gridlocked, both
sides are to blame for failing to lead on important issues.
To be fair, Plait does toss in a token criticism of President Obama for
insufficiently funding NASA. (But, considering he used to work for NASA, he is
perhaps particularly sensitive to this issue.) As usual, Plait reserves
his ire almost exclusively for Republicans. Unfortunately, his retelling of
history is rather incomplete.
For instance, Plait criticizes Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana
for signing into law a policy that could undermine the teaching of evolution
in schools. Absent from Plait’s analysis is the fact that, when the bill
was passed in 2008, the Louisiana legislature was _controlled by Democrats_
(http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_331_1901.aspx) .
He also rattles off a _list_
(http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2012/10/06/the_us_congress_anti_science_committee.html)
of anti-science
Congressmen, all Republicans. Excluded from his list are the _53 Democratic
Congressmen and Senators_
(http://www.boxer.senate.gov/en/press/releases/031212.cfm) (compared to only
two Republicans) who wrote a letter to the FDA
demanding labels on genetically modified food. This policy position is in
direct
opposition to that held by organizations representing America’s finest
scientists and doctors – the American Association for the Advancement of
Science (_AAAS_
(http://www.realclearscience.com/2012/10/26/largest_science_society_says_039no039_to_gmo_labeling_249731.html)
) and the American Medical
Association (_AMA_
(http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2012/06/the-anti-science-crusade-against-gmos.html)
).
Plait also failed to mention the group of Democratic Congressmen who
support a resolution proposing a new hypothesis about global warming: That
climate change will cause an _increase in the number of hookers_
(http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/296679-dems-warn-climate-change-could-drive-wom
en-to-transactional-sex) around the globe.
Also AWOL from Plait’s list is Tom Harkin, the _quack-loving_
(http://www.realclearscience.com/articles/2013/01/31/science_says_good_riddance_sen_tom_ha
rkin_106451.html) , homeopathy-pushing Senator from Iowa who is
responsible for helping legitimize alternative medicine. Such pseudoscientific
voodoo
has done more to harm average Americans than any misguided teachings on
evolution or climate change.
Plait goes on to lament how scientific reports were censored in the “Bad
Old Days” of the George W. Bush administration. He conveniently leaves out
that the Obama Administration _purposefully withheld information from
scientists_
(http://articles.latimes.com/2010/oct/06/nation/la-na-1007-oil-spill-criticism-20101007)
during the BP oil spill and _doctored documents_
(http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44921.html) to make it appear as if
scientists agreed with the drilling moratorium they implemented. And he did
not mention that the Obama administration _interfered with the FDA’s
approval_
(http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/12/genetically_modified_salmon_aquadvantage_fda_assessment_is_delayed_possibly.html)
of genetically modified salmon.
The biggest bee in Plait’s bonnet was the latest bill proposed by Rep.
Lamar Smith, which orders the National Science Foundation to only fund
research
which is in the _national interest_
(http://news.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2013/04/us-lawmaker-proposes-new-criteri-1.html)
. This is a very bad
idea for multiple reasons, and Plait is correct to call for its defeat.
But Plait’s characterization that “Smith wants politics to trump science”
Soviet-style is absurd. The NSF’s mission is to promote science,
engineering and technology. The fact that fields like psychology and sociology
receive funding from the NSF means that politics has already trumped science.
The
NSF should never have gotten involved in social studies, especially
political science, and Smith’s bill – while poorly thought-out – is almost
certainly aimed at them.
Finally, at the end of the article, Plait makes something of a confession:
I know I focus a lot on these attacks coming from the far right—because
that’s where the overwhelming majority originate—but in truth they’re coming
from all directions, and it’s up to us to do something about it. [Emphasis
added]
Wrong. Plait focuses on the far right because he is a partisan. He ignores
the equally massive volume of anti-science garbage coming from the far left
because he sympathizes with that side of the aisle. It is confirmation
bias combined with _motivated forgetting_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivated_forgetting) .
This is why many Americans find the media so infuriating. There is barely
even a pretense of giving both sides of the story. Instead, the media is
divided into ideological camps, and each side only tells half the truth. It’s
like watching litigation on Judge Judy, except far more obnoxious.
Besides, as journalists and science writers, it really is unbecoming to so
openly display partisan politics. Not only is it bad for the public’s faith
in science journalism, but it is equally bad for the public’s faith in the
scientific enterprise itself.
Dr. Alex B. Berezow is the editor of RealClearScience and co-author of
_Science Left Behind_ (http://www.amazon.com/dp/1610391640) . He holds a PhD
in
microbiology.
--
--
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
