Did you know that when U.S. scientists go overseas to participate in scientific forums and conferences they are given a list of things they aren’t supposed to talk about? I think anyone would understand if the taboo list included defense department secrets or classified scientific discoveries, but guess what, polar bears, who at last glance don’t appear to be an essential component of the Early Warning System, can’t be discussed.
You see, the polar ice caps that bears tend to habituate are melting. And some people believe that the reason that the ice caps are melting is, shhhhh, global warming. Oh yeah, global warming and climate change are also on the no-no list. Well, to be fair, scientists can bring up polar bears, ice caps, and global warming as long as the scientist “understands the administration’s position on climate change, polar bears, and sea ice and will not be speaking on or responding to these issues”.
Isn’t it kind of pathetic that scientific discussion is bound by political positions? When I was a kid we all laughed at the Russian government’s control of the scientific community and eternally pathetic positions on agriculture and engineering. Personally, I don’t see much difference here. Science is science. Whether or not you agree that global warming is caused by humans or suppressed by the bloviating of right-wing talk show hosts, scientific theory and scientific thought should not be bound by the whims of a political position.
Suppose the Dems win the White House in 2008 and decide that human-based global warming is a fact, I suspect many of you will come around to see the wisdom of my position…