A little while ago, I heard from The Intersection about what seemed (to me) to be a fantastically great idea: having the presidential candidates debate science and science-related issues. There have been a few people on the scienceblogs website that agree with my POV and some that disagree. However, just in case you want to know why I think that having a presidential debate on science is a good thing, check out the following (yes, Huckabee and I don't agree on many things):
If you want more (or better) reasons (in case the written statements on ScienceDebate 2008 website are not good enough for you) why it would be very good to hear why the presidential candidates should have a debate on science and science-related topics (as if scientists and science-related people don't know the reason already), then you will be happy to know that there are a number of videos available on the ScienceDebate 2008 website (to supplement all the written statements).
Now, in case you don't want to scroll through all the interviewees' responses on ScienceBlogs 2008 (you lazy bugger!), then I have embedded a few of the ones that I think are good. (Ha! That means that if you want to learn about other experts' points-of-view, you still have to check out the website).
ROSINA BIERBAUM - Dean of School of Natural Resources, University of Michigan
STEVE CHU - Director of Lawrence-Berkeley National Laboratory, Nobel Prize (Physics) Co-Recipient 1997
JOHN HOLDREN - Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
JOHN C. MATHER - Senior Astrophysicist NASA, Nobel Prize (Physics) Recipient 2006
No comments:
Post a Comment