JerryBoyle
09-16-2020, 11:03 AM
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/scien...b6e27db133a902
Scientific American has dipped a toe into political waters for the first time
in its 175-year history and is endorsing Joe Biden for president.
The science and research publication is publishing the endorsement in a two-page statement in its upcoming October issue.
“Scientific American has never endorsed a presidential candidate in its 175-year history,” the editors wrote. “This year we are compelled to do so. We do not do this lightly.”
As would be expected of a science-focused publication, the editors rested their argument on facts and evidence, concluding that Trump’s rejection of facts and evidence “has badly damaged the U.S. and its people.”
In everything from Trump’s “dishonest and inept response to the COVID-19 pandemic” to his attacks on “environmental protections, medical care, and the researchers and public science agencies that help this country prepare for its greatest challenges,” Trump’s refusal to make fact-based, data-driven decisions has pushed the U.S. far off course, they argued.
The editorial board highlighted Trump’s pandemic response as a particularly deleterious example of Trump making the health and economic fallout worse ― not better.
What else can an anti-science president expect?
A Nobel prize in Reality TV Presidenting?
**Reposted since it was simply an exercise in trolling and not an actual rule. Glad we got that out of the way.
Scientific American has dipped a toe into political waters for the first time
in its 175-year history and is endorsing Joe Biden for president.
The science and research publication is publishing the endorsement in a two-page statement in its upcoming October issue.
“Scientific American has never endorsed a presidential candidate in its 175-year history,” the editors wrote. “This year we are compelled to do so. We do not do this lightly.”
As would be expected of a science-focused publication, the editors rested their argument on facts and evidence, concluding that Trump’s rejection of facts and evidence “has badly damaged the U.S. and its people.”
In everything from Trump’s “dishonest and inept response to the COVID-19 pandemic” to his attacks on “environmental protections, medical care, and the researchers and public science agencies that help this country prepare for its greatest challenges,” Trump’s refusal to make fact-based, data-driven decisions has pushed the U.S. far off course, they argued.
The editorial board highlighted Trump’s pandemic response as a particularly deleterious example of Trump making the health and economic fallout worse ― not better.
What else can an anti-science president expect?
A Nobel prize in Reality TV Presidenting?
**Reposted since it was simply an exercise in trolling and not an actual rule. Glad we got that out of the way.