Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AIP Probes Bush, Kerry On Science Issues

Posted by timothy on from the hey-that's-the-aliens'-technique-too dept.

martensitic writes "Physics Today (the 50-year-old monthly publication of the American Institute of Physics) continues their election-year tradition with this special report, posing nine questions 'in an effort to get the candidates to specifically address questions of interest to the science community'. The 'sometimes direct and sometimes vague' written responses 'show fundamental differences on several key issues.'"

5 of 54 comments (clear)

  1. mean voters by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We're nerds (ahem, I'm just a geek...) - we're not the average voters. These are the issues we care about, and on which we make our decisions. Everyone has some special interest that makes them "not the average voter". We are unusual, though, in that we can understand the difference between average, median and lowest common denominator voters.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  2. Fact Check by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Unlike other constituents, our questions have factual answers. I'd like to see _Physics Today_ factcheck those answers for their readers (us). Their standard deviations from the truth would be as instructive as their answers.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  3. Very revealing answer on Question #4 by Pluvius · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Bush: We have not identified any need for developing new nuclear weapons.
    Kerry: [A] KerryEdwards administration will stop this administration's program to develop a new class of nuclear weapons.

    Uh, what?

    Rob (I seem to remember reading something about plans for bunker-busting nukes, but I'll let someone else do the research)

  4. So the Administration fails that test. by panurge · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Spending on science actually underpins national security, the economy, health care and the environment. And I guess that soft sciences like psychology and sociology have an impact on social security (as well as national security, if you take criminology into account.) So you are right in stating the attitude of dumb-cluck voters, but wrong in that you don't understand how the world works. I don't know enough about the overall pattern of US R&D to be able to say which possible administration would do the best job, but I do know that an administration that does not understand the fundamental importance of science is not in America's - or the world's - long term interest. And if you are aged less than 70, you should be very interested in the long term.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
  5. Re:Nuclear, Energy, and Environment issues for Bus by Sir+Holo · · Score: 2, Interesting


    You sure don't sound like a physicist.


    3. Energy. If there's one thing Physicists love to talk about it is energy. No one understands what energy is better than physicists. Energy is the end-all idol they worship, if they worship any idol at all. How do we exploit the energy out there? How do we get more and more of it delivered to the masses?

    Do you even know any physicists? If scientists (physicists, etc..) worship anything it's truth and knowledge. The only time we talk about delivering anything to the masses is in funding proposals. Funding to fuel the search for knowledge.


    Physicists don't drink the kool-aid on global warming.

    That's not how any scientists that I know talk about anything. "Drink the kool-aid?" Not much of a scientific argument, is it?


    Bush is willing to shovel the money they need into their labs.

    The national labs have had declining (several % per year) budgets through this and several previous administrations.


    They know that human ingenuity trumps all, that no problem is impossible to solve.

    Huh? No. What are you talking about? Have you been drinking Kool-aid again?