Sunday, August 31, 2008

Sarah Palin is not a scientist. Not even close.

I don't want Sarah Palin making policy on scientific research. Or casting the tie-breaking Senate vote on environmental issues.

Heck, I wouldn't even want her teaching my kids first-grade science class.

Reason #1 (via Newsmax)
Newsmax: What is your take on global warming and how is it affecting our country?

Palin: A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I'm not one though who would attribute it to being man-made.
Palin thinks global warming is not man-made. WTF?! That is simply ignorant.

No scientist will debate that humans have caused rising carbon-dioxide levels and therefore increased mean annual temperatures worldwide. It is simply a fact.

I can only assume that she is clinging to the Bush doctrine (More Oil = Good Policy) because it is politically expedient in Alaska.

Or else she needs to have serious environmental conversation with someone - anyone - at the University of Alaska Geophysical Institute.

Governor, if you are reading this, go ahead and email any professor at your state university. I guarantee it will be illuminating.

Reason #2 (via adn.com)
Republican Sarah Palin said she thinks creationism should be taught alongside evolution in the state's public classrooms.

Palin was answering a question from the moderator near the conclusion of Wednesday night's televised debate on KAKM Channel 7 when she said, "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both."

So my Governor and Republican VP candidate thinks creationism deserves a place in my classroom. Umm, well... got an ethical problem here, boss. I would never present any mythological version of creation as a scientific fact.

To be fair, Palin does not advocate creationism as a mandated part of our state science curriculum. She "only" wants to allow the debate in the classroom.

So we can fairly say that she is not an off-the-wall-lunatic. She is "only" a scientifically-misinformed individual who is capable of pandering to religious voters.

Somehow, that doesn't make me feel much better.

2 comments:

GDub said...

Great post, Andrew. I have to agree with you fully on this.

ginga said...

Great post Andrew.