Will U.S. presidential candidates debate science policy?
Shawn Lawrence Otto of Science Debate 2008 speaks to NPR science broadcast journalists at EarthSky headquarters on April 6, 2008. (Credit: © Jorge Salazar. All rights reserved.)
Shawn Lawrence Otto: It used to be, when I was a kid, that if there was a moon shot, all the classes were canceled. This nation gathered all of its kids in its auditoriums and wheeled in a TV, and everybody watched that rocket take off. That’s how committed we were to science.
You’re listening to Shawn Lawrence Otto, one of the organizers of Science Debate 2008. This is a nonpartisan citizen-led initiative – backed by thousands of scientists – an effort to persuade the U.S. presidential candidates to debate key issues of science policy.
Shawn Lawrence Otto: One of them is climate change. Every Nobel laureate that I’ve talked to in this process, and I’ve talked to a lot of them now, agrees essentially with the statement that the next one to two presidential administrations are most likely going to determine the quality of life on Earth for the foreseeable future.
Another key science issue, according to Otto — the rise of Asian economies.
Shawn Lawrence Otto: By 2010, 90 percent of all scientists and engineers will be living in Asia. That’s a very big change in the fundamental economics of the globe, particularly as they relate to the United States. So how are we going to compete?
Otto spoke of another key word in the 2008 election — the word “hope.”
Shawn Lawrence Otto: And we can, if we unite our politicians and policy makers with our scientists, we can pull together like we have in the past. We put a man on the moon, We can tackle climate change.
Shawn Otto on science in an election year
Listen to the 8-minute Clear Voices podcast.
NEW! Find related content with Sphere
I say spend more money on Nasa then this stupid idea. Only your instroments have noticed a change. No animal can notice a chage in the climate. The Earth has cooled and warmed many times. uring the 1200s there was a cooling period that caused people to stay inside more and causing the black plague. Also before that period there was a warm period where greenland was actually green and sheep could live there. In this forum people talk about a mini ice age age which shows people dont affect the climate. http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=90232
then the Earth warmed up again without the help of pollution.
Presidental canidates debate science- Wishing for a pot of Gold at the end of the rainbow is more realistic than having them debate science. After all a degree in Jurisprudence is not science! I wouldn’t support them because a lawyer is “A” moral.