Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
....
What can I say if people think Bush and the Republicans are the only people who will attempt to use data to promote their cause.
It is interesting, but a difference between conservatives and liberals is that perhaps as a conservative I assume people will do what they think is in their best interest, liberals seem to be surprised by this and further assume people who believe as they do would never manipulate data to prove a point or be self-serving. To that I say - mmmm?!?
|
Ace...I dont think anyone here suggested that Bush and the Repubs are the only people who attempt to use data to promote their cause. But they are (were) the ones who set policy in both the White House and Congress for the last six years and are the ones who should be held accountable if scientific studies were manipulated or suppressed for political purposes.
IMO, you have done exactly what you have accused others of (in another
political thread):
Your words: "I have also noticed that when some are proven wrong or challenged directly they tend to ignore those points and back off, often picking something trivial to respond to. I often find it all amusing."
You
ignored and backed-off my response to your more salient point that the scientific community should evaluate scientific findings:
My words: I agree that the debate should be between scientists, but there is no reason why that debate cant occur in a political forum (ie Congressional hearing).The problem exposed in the OP is that it is not the scientific community, but policy wonks (political appointees) in the EPA, NOAA, USGS, FDA, Fish/Wildlife Service, etc. who are allegedly "editing" or suppressing government studies by career scientists that do not support the Bush ideological agenda.
....and
responded to the less relevant (trivial) background I added about Waxman and the tobacco industry...along with vague generalizations about conservatives and liberals.
I find it amusing as well
