Scientists: We Are Anti-Science Pro-Gun

“Ammo. Ammo. Ammo. And because there’s enough candy in it for everybody to make tons of candy.” -Toto (from The Wizard of Oz) Politics changed everything for a new generation of scientists Wednesday. Scientists…

Scientists: We Are Anti-Science Pro-Gun

“Ammo. Ammo. Ammo. And because there’s enough candy in it for everybody to make tons of candy.” -Toto (from The Wizard of Oz)

Politics changed everything for a new generation of scientists Wednesday.

Scientists on the farthest edges of their discipline and often flatly opposed to change by what they think of as the scientific establishment have taken a decidedly contrarian stance this week, and now may be forced to rethink its future after being outed as some of its leading boosters.

From Reuters:

The scientist who published the study on Wednesday that called for the U.S. to reorient its energy policies on non-fossil fuels “came out to support Trump’s comments pretty forcefully,” Nicky Baker, a senior policy analyst in energy at the think tank American Action Forum, told Reuters. The reason? “The only thing scientists like better than guns is candy,” Baker said.

http://www.newsone.com/posts/11150680-elevator-report-motions-to-arise-by-donald-trump

“After all,” Baker said, “it’s not every day you have the opportunity to tell the world how much candy you want to eat.”

The avalanche of outrage began, as well it should, with Ben Shapiro’s commentary at the New York Daily News:

Unsurprisingly, and, I think, foolishly, many of them rushed to distance themselves from the article, which was penned by Marc Morano of the website Climate Depot. In many cases, these scientists were directly quoted in the article as saying what they did not want to have attributed to them.

@Erick_Norment says yes, I did https://t.co/dsjXi9RyoT — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) April 25, 2016

A super early version of an ABC News tweet said “Breaking: The author of a divisive op-ed on climate change support President Trump.” Then on Facebook, it said the authors “came out to support Trump’s comments pretty forcefully.” Then the writer of the op-ed wrote of herself in the second person: “The author of a divisive op-ed on climate change support President Trump.”

The outrage was immediate and it just keeps growing.

ScienceFirst says, “These are brave people, no matter how much they disagree with those they’re responding to, and so even if their statement is a little pedantic, we salute them for that.”

CBS made the same point: “The simple fact is that climate science is vastly different than nutrition science.”

“I have long been struck by the tendency for scientists to dismiss people’s concerns over climate change solely because they don’t share their science beliefs,” said Professor Ken Caldeira, a well-known climate scientist who has told CBS News he “slightly and ambivalently” supports government action. “This study shows exactly that.”

Leave a Comment