Abuses of Science Political Cartoon Contest

AngryNick writes "The Union of Concerned Scientists has announced a cartoon contest for amateur and professional artists. 'The absurdity of political interference in science is fertile ground for satire,' said Dr. Francesca Grifo, Director of the UCS Scientific Integrity Program. 'We hope these contests encourage amateur and professional cartoonists alike to express concern--through humor and art--about the impact of the abuse of science on our safety, health and environment.' A celebrity judge panel will select twelve finalists and the public will then choose the Grand Prize winner. The winner will receive a host of prizes, including $500 and an all-expenses-paid trip to have lunch with the celebrity judge of his or her choice. You can read Contest details, sample topics and the list of celebrity judges."

Comments

Abuses of Science?

[deft]

Abuses of science.... poorly worded?

Wow, did anyone else read that headline and think that they were inviting people to make their political attacks on science in a cartoon?

I expected a cartoon attacking stem cell research, of maybe a mushroom cloud over hiroshima with the caption "scientific progress".

Of course, it's completely the other way, as I would hope... but yeah, title misleading!

Lyndon Johnson's Record

[Valdrax]

Michael Crichton once again shows how focusing on local differences and exceptions and extrapolating them as a trend is an intellectual folly. If you want to seriously argue that the EPA budget-cutting, pro-mercury in the air, pro-arsenic in the water, pro-relaxation of pesticide rules Republicans that adamantly refuse to entertain the idea of ratifying Kyoto treaty are no different from the Democrats, then you're deliberately cherry-picking your facts to bolster your dellusional worldview -- you know, like Michael Crichton does.

Nixon was moderate to liberal on a number of domestic issues from wage controls to gun control to affirmative action to establishing the EPA, OSHA, and NOAA. He supported a lot of market regulation in a time period that pundits were saying that conservatism was dead. He was very different from many conservatives today, and many of his policies were great successes that were overshadowed by his personal corruption.

As for Johnson, he did open up a pristine area to drilling. However, he also said the following when signing the Clean Water Act:

"No one has the right to use America's rivers and America's Waterways, that belong to all the people as a sewer. The banks of a river may belong to one man or one industry or one State, but the waters which flow between the banks should belong to all the people."

Johnson's record on the environment was overall quite good. His wife Lady Bird Johnson was a tireless environmental advocate. It was Johnson's administration that first started looking into the environment as a matter of air and water pollution instead of just protected land conservation. Nixon just kept the ball rolling that Johnson kicked off. From the Wikipedia, here is a list of environmental regulations kicked off in the Johnson era:

• Clear Air, Water Quality and Clean Water Restoration Acts and Amendments
• Wilderness Act of 1964
• Endangered Species Preservation Act of 1966
• National Trail System Act of 1968
• Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968
• Land and Water Conservation [Fund] Act of 1965
• Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965
• Motor Vehicle Air Pollution Control Act of 1965
• Aircraft Noise Abatement Act of 1968

To suggest that Johnson (and thus Democrats) are and were not environmentalists based on one single action against shows Crichton's lack of intellectual integrity.

Re:wish I could draw...

[Aladrin]

Man, it took me a bit to understand that, but that's about exactly right. I believe in God -and- evolution, and don't understand how people can flat refuse to believe God is powerful enough to use evolution as his tool.