Chemical Forums

General Forums => Generic Discussion => Topic started by: Mitch on August 14, 2004, 07:12:18 PM

Title: Bush vs. Science
Post by: Mitch on August 14, 2004, 07:12:18 PM
This article did a good job describing the main frustrations both sides feel. It's written by AP and seems balance. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=624&e=2&u=/ap/bush_scientists
Title: Re:Bush vs. Science
Post by: jdurg on August 14, 2004, 11:45:00 PM
George W. Bush is the worst thing that the scientific community of the U.S.A. has ever seen.  I hate that man and hope he burns in hell for eternity.  He's a spoiled little brat who only cares about his own image and not about the country he is in charge of running.  His stance against stem-cell research infuriates me like you wouldn't believe.  As a type I diabetic, stem-cell research is my only hope at being cured.  As long as he is in office, there is no chance that any of it will happen.  He is tying his religious beliefs into the law of the land and the constitution clearly forbids that.  If he is elected again, I will seriously consider ex-patriating and moving to Canada where at least they care about medical coverage and scientific research.
Title: Re:Bush vs. Science
Post by: hmx9123 on September 11, 2004, 03:31:12 PM
I would agree with everything you said with one exception:

"George W. Bush is the worst thing that the scientific community of the U.S.A. has ever seen."

I don't think that it's limited to just the scientific community; he's the wost thing most every facet of the US has ever seen. :)
Title: Re:Bush vs. Science
Post by: Limpet Chicken on September 11, 2004, 07:30:37 PM
George bush is a bumbling great idiot, he would be a laughing stock if he didn't have all that power combined with a megamaniacal desire to plunder and rape other countries of their resources like a gigantic bloodsucking parasitic worm.

G.W.B is a greedy and stupid man, and a menace to civilisation,  it is my firm belief that he CANNOT be allowed to continue in a position of power of any sort, he is a danger to mankind, let alone science.
Title: Re:Bush vs. Science
Post by: Donaldson Tan on September 11, 2004, 11:27:37 PM
I'm not sure if any of you are only frustrated at his science policies..

Heh.. In my view, GWB's stand is driving talented scientists out of USA to countries that allow greater degree of freedom in scientific research, eg. Singapore & India. It facilitates the decentralisation of high technological advances in life science through out the world. I think it's actually beneficial on a global scale.

LOL
Title: Re:Bush vs. Science
Post by: hmx9123 on September 14, 2004, 02:26:22 PM
Just OOC, how can you say that Singapore has a greater degree of scientific freedom?  I mean, things may be crappy here under W, but the whole point is that W is making our country more like Singapore (i.e., more like a police state) by taking away freedoms and civil rights. (Don't get me wrong, either, I'm not putting down Singapore, just saying that it's not where I'd choose to live).  Maybe I'm mistaken about the scientific community in Singapore and it stands apart from the Stazi-like government, but after some conversations with other chemists from Singapore that now live in the US, my guess is that chemists that leave the US don't wind up going to Singapore.
Title: Re:Bush vs. Science
Post by: Donaldson Tan on September 16, 2004, 01:57:27 PM
Singapore is strict in terms of subversion and the usual criminal activities, such as theft and smuggling. That's why Singapore is so safe (thus boring). An overtly strong right wing political presence and effective policing results in Singapore being known as a nanny state.

In terms of research, the government advocates stem cell research, genetic engineering and likes of such technology that stem a strong bio-ethical concern. In my opinion, the government'll support any R&D that makes good money.
Title: Re:Bush vs. Science
Post by: Limpet Chicken on September 17, 2004, 12:46:36 PM
Problem with the Bush government is, apart from bush being greedy and mentally deficient, is that he allows religion to influence policy, religion, and the worship of an entity 'god' that does not exist by one man should play no part in influencing the lifes of millions of citizens, or indeed, any other than the single person/bush
that holds those beliefs.
Title: Re:Bush vs. Science
Post by: Mitch on September 17, 2004, 01:28:50 PM
nature just recently published the responces of Kerry and Bush to a series of science questions. Go check it out if you have access.
Title: Re:Bush vs. Science
Post by: billnotgatez on September 17, 2004, 11:21:12 PM
Mitch - can you give a brief synopsis of what was published for those of us who do not subscribe to nature?