haha take that science...

[jverne]

umm...wait a second! thats not good is it?!

http://www.physorg.com/news85254012.html

Bu(tt)sh has now control of science...sort of

 

[Ennui]

wow.

 

[Moto]

Cool! First Ammendment restrictions! Gotta love that.

 

[theotherguy]

Disgusting.

Science should not be scrutinized by politics whatsovever. Science is a self-regulated entity and should continue to be. If the findings don't fit your policy...too bad; let scientific scrutiny weed the good from the bad and keep the government's censoring out of it.

 

[Link]

"Great news Mr President, we have proved that the sky is blue!"
"I'm sorry son, you can't tell anyone that"
"Why?"
"Official policy says that the skys actually pink"

 

[Ridge]

Wow. That cant be legal.

 

[Moto]

The American people are losing their rights slowly but surely. It disgusts me and it makes me so upset that so few can control so many. Who had a say in this decision? Did I? No. Where's the will of the people in all of this? That's supposed to be what our country is all about. We learn about it in school, hear about it everyday, but it seems like it doesn't exist. Why can't we decide if our new senator can swear in on the Koran? Why can't I choose whether I want a North American Union to form? It's ridiculous. I love this country but I cannot stand the people "in charge" of it. We're supposed to be in charge.

Science isn't something that can be looked over by some government officials who decide what's okay and what isn't. We're not grading exams here. The government doesn't have an answer sheet. Science is a global community. Governments don't need to regulate it. If something is bogus, it's bogus and the rest of the world will make it a point to let you know. Unbelievable.

 

[0mar]

Fascism. Pure and simple.

 

[15357]

Fascism. Pure and simple.

Stop insulting fascism. This is stupidity, pure and simple.

 

[el Chi]

"This is not about stifling or suppressing our science, or politicizing our science in any way,"
Not of course it's not.

I swear, the last couple of years (and I get the impression that it's especially over the last 18 months or so) things have gone from
"Groan! Only in America!" accompanied with a rolling of the eyes and a sardonic smile to fully-blown
"This is one step ever closer to full-blown totalitarianism" accompanied with eyes wide a jaw hanging involuntarily open slightly in disbelief.
Although of course it will never be labelled as such, because it's The Land of The Free?. Maybe retrospectively, eh?
I worry for the sane people in the US, I really do.
More than that, I worry of the effects US governmental behaviour like this will have on the rest of the world.

 

[jverne]

just for mecha (if you're not mecha don't answer!!):

why don't you lock this thread up?
there is no evidence the government will suppress science, so this is basically a conspiracy theory, right?
just speculations.

but of course you want only 100% evident and document proof, right?
by your standards this thread is spam, right?

then feel free to lock it up.

 

[Flyingdebris]

call me crazy, but after having read the whole article, the overall impression seems to be that scientists now are supposed to consult with their peers on their findings prior to publication to ensure a larger measure of reliability and alert the government of stuff that is potentially important. It feels like the only reason people are putting this into the "ZOMG FACISM!!!" category is because the bush administration put it forward, rather than because of the actual facts. I couldn't find anything in that article that would imply the censorship of information.

I'm guessing its to combat cases of "yes drug x is an awesome cure for y disease" and then 3 years later "oops, sorry turns out drug x F***s you up several times worse than the disease its meant to treat and makes your future kids deformed"

 

[jverne]

call me crazy, but after having read the whole article, the overall impression seems to be that scientists now are supposed to consult with their peers on their findings prior to publication to ensure a larger measure of reliability and alert the government of stuff that is potentially important. It feels like the only reason people are putting this into the "ZOMG FACISM!!!" category is because the bush administration put it forward, rather than because of the actual facts. I couldn't find anything in that article that would imply the censorship of information.

I'm guessing its to combat cases of "yes drug x is an awesome cure for y disease" and then 3 years later "oops, sorry turns out drug x F***s you up several times worse than the disease its meant to treat and makes your future kids deformed"

we'll never now, it might or it might not.

 

[Stigmata]

I don't think this will be a problem until people start applying some sort of subjective veto power. I'm cautiously optimistic about this.

 

[Atomic_Piggy]

Lol crazy.

 

[kirovman]

I don't think this will be a problem until people start applying some sort of subjective veto power. I'm cautiously optimistic about this.

I'm cautiously optimistic about this.


But seriously, science doesn't need government intervention. Science needs scientists (and money!). The Soviet Union tried to intervene in science, because apparently stuff like Relativity went against their Soviet doctrine... the only reason science survived is because Stalin was told the atomic bomb could not be completed without it.

 

[Ridge]

WTF. Why are you posting a link to holocaust shit?

 

[theotherguy]

call me crazy, but after having read the whole article, the overall impression seems to be that scientists now are supposed to consult with their peers on their findings prior to publication to ensure a larger measure of reliability and alert the government of stuff that is potentially important. It feels like the only reason people are putting this into the "ZOMG FACISM!!!" category is because the bush administration put it forward, rather than because of the actual facts. I couldn't find anything in that article that would imply the censorship of information.

I'm guessing its to combat cases of "yes drug x is an awesome cure for y disease" and then 3 years later "oops, sorry turns out drug x F***s you up several times worse than the disease its meant to treat and makes your future kids deformed"

No, not at all.

Scientists must already consult with peers, its called peer review. Before something is funded, accepted or published it must be rigourously reproduced by the scientific community and verified to be true.

In science this has always been true since the days of sir francis bacon, it is a major factor of science.

This is not at all peer review, but government review. This is also not government regulation based on saftey, as the FDA does, this is government regulation based on policy, for issues totally unrelated to human saftey, like the discovery of particles in physics or the discovering of environmental evidence for global warming. The "alert the government" part is to ensure that cronies in office can get their story straight when confronted with scientific evidence that contradicts the party line. It also means that the government can take steps to prevent such information from being published if it hurts their cause.



This is nothing short of government censorship, and it must be stopped now.

 

[Stigmata]

No, not at all.

Scientists must already consult with peers, its called peer review. Before something is funded, accepted or published it must be rigourously reproduced by the scientific community and verified to be true.

In science this has always been true since the days of sir francis bacon, it is a major factor of science.

This is not at all peer review, but government review. This is also not government regulation based on saftey, as the FDA does, this is government regulation based on policy, for issues totally unrelated to human saftey, like the discovery of particles in physics or the discovering of environmental evidence for global warming. The "alert the government" part is to ensure that cronies in office can get their story straight when confronted with scientific evidence that contradicts the party line. It also means that the government can take steps to prevent such information from being published if it hurts their cause.



This is nothing short of government censorship, and it must be stopped now.

Well then.

In light of this: F*** this government-review ideology.