Both eugenics and social Darwinism had their moments in their sun, the optimistic goal of progressive techno-elites 100 years ago who wanted to use science to make the world a better place.
Sounds terrific, right? Isn't that what vaccines and genetically modified food do also?
Indeed, but vaccines and GMOs are for all people and not against some, the way eugenics was. The experience of eugenics may be why so many progressives, the group that embraced and mandated and enforced it as social policy, are so anti-science today; they don't trust science or themselves when science is under their control.
Can you be liable for damages if you didn't
mean to do it? Can the pollution laws of one country be enforced in another? When it comes to politics and the environment, laws really only count when they are on your side, as we saw
when Germans ironically declared it wrong for an American to dump iron dust in the ocean for a geo-engineering experiment, yet the same loophole
was completely ethical when they did it three years ago.
It's a modern technology world. If you were running for president in 2008, you could just forgo public financing of your campaign and stick your opponent with a hard cap of half as much advertising money as you have - then you could spend as much money yourself as both candidates combined spent in 2004.
But in 2012 everyone has unlimited money so outspending the other guy with campaign ads won't work again. Instead, politicians are spending money on data mining, so they know what your hot buttons are.
Physics professor Paul Frampton of UNC Chapel Hill is sitting in an Argentine jail, busted for trying to smuggle out 2 kilos of cocaine, but that hasn’t stopped him from asking for a raise on his $107,000 annual salary - raise as in he wants it doubled.
Hey, he has tenure. And a lot of citations.
Frampton is in a spat with the school because he says they are improperly withholding his salary. They contend his being in an Argentine prison cell for virtually all of this year means he can't possibly be doing any work, even for a tenured professor.
An iron dumping experiment was recently conducted by an environmentally concerned group who believe controlled geo-engineering may be the solution to impending science issues. It was conducted without involvement from the scientific community and without proper governance.
Most people regard journalists as biased, though it is most evident in the bias of journalists at places politically different from the consumer - in the US, MSNBC viewers regard Fox News consumers as biased while Fox News consumers regard everyone else as biased.
Science media does not have this issue because everyone votes the same way politically and it makes no difference; except on political issues that attract political demographics, like GMOs or climate change, science media can stick to science. What about sports? Can a sports journalist be biased?
They can. It just may not be evident when it comes to their sports coverage.
Blood Pressure Medication Adherence May Not Be Cost, It May Be Annoyance At Defensive Medicine
On January 5th, Don't Get Divorced Because Of Hallmark Movies
Does Stress Make Holidate Sex More Likely?
To Boomers, An AI Relationship Is Not Cheating
