In this book leading scientists share their experiences and observations of developing and testing hypotheses, offering insights on the dangers of manipulating science for political gain. It describes how politicization--whether by misapplication, overextension, or outright manipulation of the scientific record to advance particular policy agendas--imposes expenditures of money, missed opportunities, and burdens on the economy.
In this book leading scientists share their experiences and observations of developing and testing hypotheses, offering insights on the dangers of manipulating science for political gain. It describes how politicization--whether by misapplication, overextension, or outright manipulation of the scientific record to advance particular policy agendas--imposes expenditures of money, missed opportunities, and burdens on the economy.
This book tells the story of Agent Orange, its usage and the policies that surround it. Agent Orange contains a contaminant known as TCDD. It was the most widely used defoliant from 1965 – 1970 and became one of three major tactical herbicides used in Vietnam. More than 45 major health studies were conducted with Vietnam veterans from the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Korea seeking a relationship between veterans’ health and TCDD. Allegations of birth defects in the families of Vietnam veterans and the Vietnamese represented a case study in propaganda and deliberate misinformation by the government of Vietnam. The Policies of the US Government implemented by Congress and the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) identified 17 recognized associated presumptive diseases that failed the tests of “cause and effect” and common sense. This book tells the story of Agent Orange, its usage, the health studies and those policies from a diverse range of perspectives, delving into science, statistics, history, policy and ethics. It is of interest to scholars engaged in history, political and social philosophy and ethics.
The attempted cures for climate change are generally worse than the disease—especially for the poor. In this groundbreaking volume, experts in all the fields related to climate change explain for laymen what we know about climate change and evaluate from a Christian perspective the proposed responses. Demands to transform the global energy infrastructure to depend heavily on wind, solar, and other renewables are harmful to people in America and the world–especially to the poor. Meanwhile, continued large-scale use of traditional energy sources like nuclear, hydro, and fossil fuels would reduce poverty while doing less harm to the environment. Climate and Energy: The Case For Realism combines outstanding climate science, physics, economics, environmental science, political science, ethics, and theology to present a well-reasoned understanding of human-induced climate change and how to respond to it.
In 2009 the US House of Representatives passed legislation requiring reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by 18 percent over the coming decade. Later that year, President Obama went to Copenhagen to sign a treaty requiring reductions by 50 percent over a two-decade period. The President came back with nothing: no firm commitment to reduce emissions and only a vague target to hold global temperature rises to under 2 C. How does a President who has a 75-vote majority in the House and a 19-vote majority in the Senate who has pre-approval for a treaty reducing greenhouse gas production by 18 percent not achieve a treaty with at least the minimum goal of 18 percent reductions by 2020?Others have answered the puzzle by looking at institutional designs or negotiation dynamics. This book articulates a multilevel process that starts with local politics to explain how they can influence international negotiations and why President Obama s efforts in Copenhagen were doomed to fail. Understanding the role of local private interests can help form strategies for overcoming national resistance to climate change legislation and ultimately international agreements that could change the environmentally self-destructive course we are on.
In Environmental Education: Identity, Politics and Citizenship the editors endeavor to present views of environmental educators that focus on issues of identity and subjectivity, and how 'narrated lives’ relate to questions of learning, education, politics, justice, and citizenship.
This book examines society's responses to many kinds of experimentation, focusing on both creation of and assessment of risks. As people seek new ways to make their lives safer and happier, the widespread process of experimentation claims victims. Some of these are people who directly and willingly accept the risks of experiments. By comparison, some are effectively experimental subjects in the hands of others who often may not even think of themselves as experimenting with the lives of consumers.The Experimental Society covers a wide spectrum of products and activities, including those that radiate into the environment like nuclear power, hydrofracking, and asbestos. The book spotlights prescription drugs and substances used in the most ordinary consumer products such as salt, caffeine, and BPA in sippy cups. It also discusses the testing of new ways of thinking, including those related to social organization and processes, and even the law itself. A particular concern is the case in which the subjects of experiments are unaware that the experiments are taking place.This lucidly written volume will be useful to practicing lawyers who specialize in personal injury law, and law professors who teach such subjects as torts and products liability, medicine, and science. Physicians and scientists in various branches of medicine will find it provocative, as will political scientists, economists, sociologists, anthropologists, and philosophers.
"If the globe is warming, is mankind responsible, or is the sun?" Such a statement does not appear out of place in Bethell's entertaining account of how modern science is politically motivated and in desperate need of oversight. Bethell writes in a compulsively readable style, and although he provides legitimate insight into the potential benefits of nuclear power and hormesis, some readers will be turned off when he attempts to disprove global warming and especially evolution. Throughout the book, Bethell makes questionable claims about subjects as varied as AIDS ("careful U.S. studies had already shown that at least a thousand sexual contacts are needed to achieve heterosexual transmission of the virus") and extinction ("It is not possible definitely to attribute any given extinction to human activity"), and backs up his arguments with references to the music magazine SPIN and thriller-writer Michael Crichton. Ironically, Bethell ends up proving his own premise by producing a highly politicized account of how liberal intellectuals and unchecked government agencies have created a "white-coated priesthood" whose lust for grant money has driven them to produce fearsome (but in Bethell's view, false) tales of ozone destruction and AIDS pandemics. In the end, this book is unlikely to sway readers who aren't already in Bethell's ideological camp, as any points worthy of discussion get lost in the glut of unsourced claims that populate this latest installment of "The Politically Incorrect Guide" series.
These are stories of the political corruption of science. Politicians work to forge a consensus, they use persuasion, intimidation, and avoid or suppress debate. Debating an issue leads to education, it shows the question is more complex than it appears, it makes the public consider all sides. Education leads to caution, not action. The politician wants a decision, he wants action, so no debate. Once the consensus is formed, the public votes, laws are passed, regulations issued, the minority concedes, and conflict is avoided. Science is not a belief. It exists to challenge the consensus view. It is how one person can show the overwhelming majority is mistaken. Scientists do not vote, they debate. They gather facts, make observations, and analyze the data and try to show the consensus opinion is wrong. Politicians and scientists don’t mix. They are like fire and water, opposites. But, what about when no one trusts the politician and he must have a scientist for back up? What happens when the government becomes the sole source of research money? We address the attempt by politicians to control scientific research and research outcomes. They do this by selectively funding projects that look for potential disasters, ideally global disasters. People love disaster stories, journalists love disaster stories, scientists love to be quoted in newspapers and on television. If you frighten people enough, they will give up their rights for security, increasing government power. So, it is not surprising that as government has taken over funding scientific research, scientists have migrated from research that helps people, to researching possible catastrophes, no matter how remote the possibility. Science has devolved from improving human lives to developing plots for disaster movies.
