Book Review: The Republican War on Science

[William Seger]

Reviewed by David Brin
September 11, 2005
The San Deigo Union-Tribune

Gathered together, these and countless other accomplishments were rooted in the modernist-scientific agenda.

So why has the whole ambitious program lately come under fierce attack?

According to Chris Mooney, author of "The Republican War on Science," we need look no further than an alliance of two reactionary forces: big business and religious fundamentalism. This era's burgeoning hostility toward rationality, skepticism, accountability and can-do ambition is little more, and no less than, a deliberate campaign against modernity on the part of "conservatism." A matter of right versus left.

Mooney presents a long list of cases to support his indictment, portraying a methodical campaign to politicize, ignore, twist or undermine science. His list of topic areas will sound familiar: the effects of smoking and of air pollution, the feasibility and benefits of energy savings through increased fuel efficiency standards, global warming and stem cell research, educational standards and the Drug War, all the way to a campaign aimed at teaching "alternatives to evolution" in the classroom. Some of these matters are still under some legitimate dispute among reputable scientists, implying that we need more research, pursued promptly and professionally. Others have coalesced around deep and profound expert consensus, with clear majorities of qualified experts recommending urgent action. Mooney shows there are countless tricks, some old and others innovative, that special interests can use when scientific consensus becomes politically inconvenient. One has been to banish science from centers of power. For example, the GOP-led Congress dismantled its own, nonpartisan advisory tool, the Office of Technology Assessment, because its counsel kept conflicting with ideological views. Another is for political aides to edit the reports of scientific panels, so that final versions offer conclusions quite different than panel members intended. Threats to job security can squelch whistleblowers. Another method, used more frequently of late, has been to pack advisory groups with "experts" who were selected on a basis of ideology, or industry affiliation, or promises to reach a predetermined outcome.

More: http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050911/news_lz1v11science.html

Featured in this week's eSkeptic newsletter. http://www.skeptic.com

[flakey_foont]

1. I just finished reading that book

there were some really nauseating revelations about some of the bullshit going on with that lot running things now..........but then, that comes as no surprise

[William Seger]

2. Indeed

... and it's hardly been reported by the corporate media -- and what little has been reported has been quickly forgotten. And the congressional Democrats have barely managed a whine about it...