Shawn Lawrence Otto on Science Debate 2008
(Credit: Teresa. Some rights reserved.)
Shawn Lawrence Otto is on the steering committee for Science Debate 2008 – what he and others in the science community hope will be the first-ever U.S. presidential debate devoted to scientific and technological policy issues.
Otto spoke with EarthSky’s Jorge Salazar.
NEW! Find related content with Sphere
THE presidential science debate will be meaning-less if
the proven far deeper use of mathematics and physics
beyond what is mainstream Algebra, Calculus and atomic
equations is not discussed.THE most deepest use of
space data, atomic data and defense data communications
is the hottest form of technology outside the United States
Government.THIS topic of discussion is ignored in science,
media and political arena.WHEN will this issue be heard.
I find it very interesting that the US will most likely be soon be surpassed by China in terms of basic scientific research and the bringing of the fruits of that research to market, according to a Jan. ’08 study by Georgia Tech that was supported by the National Science Foundation. The rest of the world is definitely talking the science talk and walking the science walk.
Shawn Otto deserves a great deal of credit. Perhaps events of this kind will help people see more clearly how the world we inhabit works and how the human species “fits” into the natural order of living things.
Humankind could soon come face to face with daunting global challenges. Science will certainly be our best possible guide in acknowledging, addressing and overcoming any and all threats to human wellbeing and environmental health. On the other hand, if we choose to ignore good science and, thereby, fail to benefit from this great gift that God has provided to the family of humanity, then I fear for the future of our children, global biodiversity and the Earth as fit place for human habitation.
With every good wish to Shawn Otto for a meaningful event,
Steve Salmony
Something is happening that many too many people appear not to be seeing, I suppose.
Scientific evidence is springing up everywhere that indicates the massive and pernicious impact of the human species on the limited resources of Earth, its frangible ecosystems and life as we know it.
Guided by mountains of carefully and skillfully developed research regarding climate change, top rank scientists like Dr. Rajendra K. Pachauri, Dr. James Hansen, Dr. Hans J. Schellnhuber and Dr. Christopher Rapley issued a Climate Code Red emergency declaration this month to leaders of governments and to the family of humanity proclaiming the necessity for open discussion and action by politicians and economic powerbrokers.
From my humble perspective, many leaders of the global political economy are turning a blind eye to human over-consumption, overproduction and overpopulation activities that can be seen recklessly dissipating the natural resources and dangerously degrading the environs of our planetary home. The Earth is being ravaged; but it appears many leaders are willfully refusing to acknowledge what is happening.
Because the emerging global challenges that could soon be presented to humanity appear to so many fine scientists as human-induced, leaders have responsibilities to assume and duties to perform, ready or not, like them or not.
Perhaps leadership in our time has too often chosen to ignore whatsoever is somehow real in order to believe whatever is politically convenient, economically expedient, socially agreeable, religiously tolerated and culturally prescribed. When something real directly conflicts with what leaders wish to believe, that reality is denied. It appears that too many leaders are content to hold tightly to widely shared and consensually validated specious thinking when it serves their personal interests.
Is humanity once again finding life as we know it dominated by a modern Tower of Babel called economic globalization? That is, has human thinking, judging and willing become so egregiously impaired by our idolatry of the artificially designed, manmade, global political economy that we cannot speak intelligibly about anything else except economic growth and profits without sounding like blithering idiots?