As the fight for the Republican candidate for the US presidency heats up, battle lines are starting to be drawn around science.
In last night's debate in the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California, Texas governor Rick Perry stood by his position that anthropogenic climate change is just a theory - and implied that Galileo would agree.
"The science is not settled on this. The idea that we would put Americans' economy at jeopardy based on scientific theory that's not settled yet to me is just nonsense," Perry said. "Just because you have a group of scientists who stood up and said, here is the fact. Galileo got outvoted for a spell."
He added, "asking us to cut back in areas that would have monstrous economic impact on our country is not good economics, and I would argue not good science."
By contrast, Jon Huntsman, former governor of Utah, emerged from the debate as a voice of reason. Back in August, Huntsman made a subtle dig at his rival when he tweeted, "I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy."
Huntsman warned that becoming the anti-science party could cost Republicans the White House.
"When you make comments that fly in the face of what 98 out of 100 climate scientists have said, when you call into question the science of evolution, all I'm saying is that, in order for the Republican Party to win, we can't run from science," he said. "By making comments that basically don't reflect the reality of the situation, we turn people off."
But will it help? In the middle of a recession, science is unlikely to be a key issue to most voters. Americans and the rest of the world may have to prepare for a science skeptic worse than George W. Bush in the Oval Office.
No comments:
Post a Comment