Whig, I think you’d better go put some ice on that. Next time, don’t lead with your chin.

Hm. I think I’ll go hang a blog post on this. Search Graphictruth for “science” and “ethics.”

Whig says:
“just a few notes: the Union of Concerned Scientists is not a scientific body, but a lobbying organization; naturally, any `survey’ they conduct is immediately suspect, for the same reason you dismiss without argument any suggestion that leftists are engaged in a war on science.”

Two things:

1)The Union of Concerned Scientists is indeed a lobbying organization OF CAREER SCIENTISTS! Naturally they push for greater scientific integrity in public discourse but to disregard their polls as biased without actually analyzing their methods is just plain igornance. Show me evidence of bias in their polling methods (and I’ll hit you back with careful example of Frank Luntz’ work). Mooney disregards the industry paid scientists because he HAS analyzed their methods and shown them to be false. He’s even written a book on it if you’d care to read it.

2) Actually, if you read the article Mooney actually cites a case where left-wing groups attack science (e.g. the biotech controversy). But this post is talking about the war on science in America, of which the left’s side of the war centers mainly on animal rights issues.

Whig says:
“but again, the war leftists have launched on science – as with the idea of “feminist mathematics” or “african science”, the war against GMO’s, not to mention pesticides and plastics, etc. etc. – is far more effective than some writer or another bleating about `intelligent design’…”

Hmmm… methinks you are mixing up a War on Technology from a War on Science. The topic of Mooney’s post (and Gerson’s and Levin’s essays), is about the attack on the information conveyed by science. The methods and ideals. Not the output. You are correct, that many on the left are weary of technology (I’m sorry but “feminist mathematics” and “african science” are weak examples of radical ideals that never caught on at all or had very little influence on general discourse in America). But there is a fundamental trust in the scientific method on the American Left.

Whig writes:
“also – to dismiss work by scientists just because they are `industry funded’ is in itself anti-science; regardless of where a researcher receives his funding, it is the *demonstration* itself which matters.”

Actually, if you read Mooney’s book (or the many reviews done by actual, hard-working scientists), there is ample EVIDENCE that industry funded scientists present biased or even false data. The “demonstration” is often done through abuse of scientific tests (e.g.- only presenting 1 null finding out of 10, biasing your tests to give you a null, etc). There is ample evidence of such scientific misconduct that it is worthless to point out except for the simple fact of pointing you to “The Republican War on Science” as a good reference.

Whig says:
“by the way, are you a scientist yourself…?”

Actually, if you use this new thing-y they call “Google”, you’ll find that Mooney is in fact a freelance writer. So he’s independent of the story. However, unlike the zealots on the right, being a scientist does not mean we adhere to dogma. Unless you care to redefine dogma as “facts.”

just a few notes: the Union of Concerned Scientists is not a scientific body, but a lobbying organization; naturally, any `survey’ they conduct is immediately suspect, for the same reason you dismiss without argument any suggestion that leftists are engaged in a war on science.

but again, the war leftists have launched on science – as with the idea of “feminist mathematics” or “african science”, the war against GMO’s, not to mention pesticides and plastics, etc. etc. – is far more effective than some writer or another bleating about `intelligent design’…

also – to dismiss work by scientists just because they are `industry funded’ is in itself anti-science; regardless of where a researcher receives his funding, it is the *demonstration* itself which matters.

by the way, are you a scientist yourself…?

Keep saying that. Eventually someone may learn something.