By Renee Schoof, McClatchy Newspapers –
WASHINGTON — Americans have trouble dealing with science, and it’s especially obvious is in presidential campaigns, says Shawn Lawrence Otto, who tried, with limited success, to get the candidates to debate scientific questions in the 2008 presidential election.
Otto is the author of a new book, “Fool Me Twice: Fighting the Assault on Science in America,” which opens with a quote from Thomas Jefferson: “Whenever the people are well informed, they can be trusted with their own government.”
And if the people and their leaders aren’t well informed and don’t use scientific information to solve modern problems, Otto suggests, the United States could soon skid into decline.
“Without the mooring provided by the well-informed opinion of the people, governments may become paralyzed or, worse, corrupted by powerful interests seeking to oppress and enslave,” he writes.
Today, he adds, Congress seems paralyzed and “ideology and rhetoric increasingly guide policy discussion, often bearing little relationship to factual reality.”
In 2008, Otto and a group of other writers tried to organize a presidential debate on science issues. Neither Barack Obama nor John McCain was interested. In the end, the two candidates agreed to respond to 14 questions in writing, and Otto’s group posted them on its website.
Otto said the group plans to try for another science debate in 2012.
Here are some questions for Otto, and his answers:
Q: Are Americans rejecting science?
A: I think it’s a myth Americans aren’t interested. It’s a myth they don’t like science and scientists … But there’s some partisan political affiliation going on, and sometimes science tells them they don’t want to hear and they don’t like to deal with. Climate change is a great example, because the problem is so enormous and the implications mean restructuring our economy and our energy supply system.
Science does two things that we don’t love. It does lots of things that we do love, but the two things we don’t love are: Whenever we extend our knowledge, we have to parse that new knowledge morally and ethically . . . . The other thing is that it either confirms or vexes somebody’s vested interested.
Q: Will we hear about science issues in the 2012 campaign?
A: I think science is going to remain a charged issue . .. Science is such a major part of everything, but particularly our unsolved challenges.
On climate change, Republican presidential candidates generally say they don’t think the science is settled, even though the nation’s scientific organizations have reported a consensus view that the Earth is warming mostly as a result of pollution from fossil fuel combustion.
Q: What makes dealing with climate change so difficult?
Nobody wants to feel bad about the future. Everybody wants to be hopeful.