- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Global warming is obviously the MOST important issue of all the issues that could come under the umbrella of "anti-science."
But I think if there's going to be a general call to arms against "anti-science," then the issues have to be broadened to include more than just the usual politically correct, risk free issues.
The pet "anti-science" issues are creationism and global warming.
But let's look at the AAAS, to see how another kind of anti-science has not only been tolerated by rewarded by American scientists.
This organization hired as CEO Dr. Alan Leshner, the man who said there didn't need to be any scientific research into medical marijuana, because federal drug policy had already declared it medically useless.
OH that's really scientific. If the federal government says it's true, then we don't need any science to test whether it's really true.
So the CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science has espoused views that are directly anti-science.
However -- drug policy is a risky area to care about, because you end up being slimed as some stoned out hedonist and get told to shove bongs in various personal orifices.
THis nasty stigmatization is probably why the American science community has disconnected with science so badly when it comes to drug policy that they hired one of the most anti-scientific drug policy leaders in the business as their leader.
The same scientists who want to stop the creationists hire a man to lead them who says once the federal government takes a position on policy, no further scrutiny from science is welcome or needed.
If the science community wants to stop global warming, I'm all for that.
But let's not paint this as a war between science and anti-science, because right now the science community is being led by a man who epitomizes American anti-science.
