Bill, I just wanted to say that I heard your speech at Cornell University almost...a year ago now. I thought it was really inspiring and I love the username. Anyway, my question is about the politics of science and is in two parts. Primarily, why do you think there is so much of a "culture of ignorance" in America, and how do you think we can combat that on a national scale, i.e. Moon landing. I know you've said renewable resources but is there perhaps something more visceral. The moon landing had a very defined beginning and foreseeable end, renewable resource energy has neither since we don't know what a really good source of energy will become or what it will look like. That kind of time commitment has, historically, been lost on the electorate.
Secondly, science is in and of itself political in nature, who gets grants (or contracts...ha) depends on whose pockets are the deepest and thereby research comes to the surface not as a result of ability or desire but of financial support. For example Exxon and Shell fund research to mitigate claims of damage done to the environment by oil, etc. The government funds (or funded) research into corn-ethanol that captivated the national attention for thirty seconds. Are you concerned that if a political shift in power takes, say a fiscal conservative swing, and decides to downsize the NIH and the NSF that it would have a profound effect by increasing private influence (loaded question) and is there anything we can do to limit the influence of "politics" in research.
Lastly, on an interview with fox you said you were glad we were done with the shuttle. Why? and what are your unadulterated feelings about Fox/Bill O'Reilly?
I know I added a question, but I just wanted to say that my going into biology and then medical school is in part because of you. Cheers.
mccartneyoverlenin89 karma
Bill, I just wanted to say that I heard your speech at Cornell University almost...a year ago now. I thought it was really inspiring and I love the username. Anyway, my question is about the politics of science and is in two parts. Primarily, why do you think there is so much of a "culture of ignorance" in America, and how do you think we can combat that on a national scale, i.e. Moon landing. I know you've said renewable resources but is there perhaps something more visceral. The moon landing had a very defined beginning and foreseeable end, renewable resource energy has neither since we don't know what a really good source of energy will become or what it will look like. That kind of time commitment has, historically, been lost on the electorate.
Secondly, science is in and of itself political in nature, who gets grants (or contracts...ha) depends on whose pockets are the deepest and thereby research comes to the surface not as a result of ability or desire but of financial support. For example Exxon and Shell fund research to mitigate claims of damage done to the environment by oil, etc. The government funds (or funded) research into corn-ethanol that captivated the national attention for thirty seconds. Are you concerned that if a political shift in power takes, say a fiscal conservative swing, and decides to downsize the NIH and the NSF that it would have a profound effect by increasing private influence (loaded question) and is there anything we can do to limit the influence of "politics" in research.
Lastly, on an interview with fox you said you were glad we were done with the shuttle. Why? and what are your unadulterated feelings about Fox/Bill O'Reilly?
I know I added a question, but I just wanted to say that my going into biology and then medical school is in part because of you. Cheers.
View HistoryShare Link