The War on Science Waged by the Republican Party and Especially by the George Bush Administration

The War on Science Waged by the Republican Party

And Especially by the George Bush Administration

I was taught that science is for the quest of truth, or ‘The Truth’. As humans’ new quest has evolved to the industry (at least what media dictates it to be), many people make it their mission to adjust others to this quest, ironically; it’s the people who would profit if the world’s state of mind would change to the industrial goal. These people who would profit from this are people in power, who have money, and obviously want to stay that way.

Science has cut the profit of companies who are involved in the use, application or consumption of unnatural substances or procedures. For already boomed companies such as car and gasoline companies, it’s almost upsetting to realize that if they were to shut down, how much money would be lost by the owners, manufacturers, economically, international trades, etc. (obviously way more complex) Then, when the subject of global warming is brought to a man such as Al Gore, a response like," an inconvenient truth" is almost understanding but too upsetting. It reminds me of a financial phrase used for business decisions, “A dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow.” When the ‘today’s dollar’ came from the detriment of the earth’s atmosphere, I would naively think and hope that something would be done, especially by the government, by embracing the helpful knowledge that science provides to ensure that there could continue to have more dollars tomorrow. As it seems, republican parties such as the Bush Administration has taken the ignorant, easy way out.

As Chris Mooney’s ‘War on Science’ explains, every time a scientific study emerges that industry doesn't like, for example, the effects of secondhand smoke, the link between atrazine and frog deaths, the near extinction of an endangered fish in a dammed river, lawyers and lobbyists can now tie the science in knots for years to come, requesting reviews and re-reviews and even challenging the findings in court. This paralysis of analysis just also creates confusion of the subject to the public and will eventually fail to ‘believe’ the scientific evidence of harm. Beyond that, the administration has tried to mislead the public about the nature of its decisions, pretending to embrace science while adopting extreme antiscientific positions. George W. Bush's August 2001 announcement that he