Presidential Politics and Science

Through a posting by vjack I learned that Reason has come out with an editorial, Evolutionary Politics, that says the same thing that I wrote in, Ron Paul's "Inappropriate Question".

That science knowledge has a great deal to do with a candidate's ability to make reasoned conclusions based on available evidence, and that candidates who ignore science are more likely to endorse bad policy.

That, insofar as votes have reason to demand that candidates reach good policy, they have reason to demand that the candidates understand at least the basics of science.

The National Center for Science is calling for A Presidential Debate on Science and Technology.

I strongly - very strongly - endorse this proposal, and encourage all readers to do the same. Not only on the Presidential level. I would also like to request that readers go to any local debates they may have an opportunity to go to and ask not only whether their policies will be governed by the best scientific evidence, but questions that indicate whether they understand science well enough for this to be the case.