a political cavalcade of mistakes
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews decided to find out whether Republican Representative Mike Pence accepts that the theory of evolution is valid. What he got in reply was nearly four minutes of talking points about stem cells and global warming after Pence declared that he believed that everything on Earth was created by a god and tried to once again parade the “teach the controversy” tactic so pivotal to the Discovery Institute’s Wedge Doctrine.
Where to begin? Well, first and foremost, Pence’s recitation of teaching all controversial theories in a science class and letting the students decide only applies if you have a controversy to begin with. You’re more likely to run into historians who deny the Holocaust than scientists who reject evolution. Something backed by 99% of experts is far from a controversy and more to the point, since evolution is based on facts, it’s only appropriate to teach it as a fact. I mean how else would you teach a collection of various facts from the biological world? Do we really have to plan our education around rants from proselytizers who seldom know anything about the theory they try so hard to deride while dragging down physics, astronomy and cosmology as well? Science is not an indoctrination opportunity and just disagreeing with facts doesn’t make them vanish into thin air.
Next, he says that a growing scientific consensus against the idea of anthropomorphic climate change gets a cold shoulder. According to the GOP, there’s been a growing consensus against the idea of global warming since the current focus on the environment began, driven in no small part by the issue of climate change. And where are all those skeptical climate experts hiding? Why is the idea that our pollution is altering the make-up of the atmosphere still accepted by mainstream science? So far, the vast majority of critics have used political arguments or tried to start heated debates about what the level of sea ice looks like based on one probe or its counterpart, or even equate weather with climate. Where is a group of skeptical PhDs in meteorology or the experts in climatology publishing papers which show that global warming either isn’t happening or overblown for no good reason? Journals publish controversial or contrarian views all the time so let’s see some papers. If there’s such a growing dissent, there should be dozens and dozens of them.
Funny enough, some on the far right allege that the whole issue of climate change is a sinister conspiracy by the UN and evil socialists who want to tax most of the American economy into submission just for kicks. And that brings us to the tax portion of Pence’s argument for giving money to something called “clean coal,” which is a nice PR word for technology that tries to sequester greenhouse gases. Ok, that’s all well and good but if you’re as serious about the environment as you say you are, what about green technology like solar or wave and tide power? Rather than help new tech, Pence and the GOP want to give away money and tax credits to a group of reliable donors and call that being responsible about the environment while acting bewildered that we see through this transparent facade and trying to convince us otherwise.
To try and bolster his green credentials, Pence says he’s in the “party of Teddy Roosevelt” and that Roosevelt created the first national parks. While Roosevelt was indeed a Republican, at the turn of the century, the GOP was a liberal party. Rather than look out for business interests and advocate low taxes, Roosevelt was a trust-busting environmentalist who built up many layers of regulation in the business world, the exact same things which make Democrats anti-business socialists according to today’s Republicans. It’s an important historical point. The political parties we know today weren’t always ascribing to the same positions and have changed their place on the political spectrum multiple times.
Finally, Pence decided to take a swipe at stem cell research by declaring that scientists ignored a number of advances that allow for the extraction of stem cells without “having to kill the embryo.” Really? Which scientists ignored it? The ones who developed a way to pinch off stem cells and start new lines, rushed to present it as a new way of working with embryonic stem cells and were completely ignored by the Bush administration? Oh and since we’re talking about science, we should note that the actual source of stem cells in question isn’t an actual embryo per se, but a ball of undifferentiated cells called a blastocyst used for fertility treatments. And if it fails inspection for IVF treatments or never gets used, it’s destroyed. So not only is Pence’s accusation dead wrong, it’s also very hypocritical because his party seemed perfectly fine with letting blastocysts be destroyed as long as none of those evil science types got to use it for stem cell research.
Matthews has a point when he says that the Republican party seems to have a problem with science. Instead of trying to learn the issues, the mouthpieces of the GOP insist on repeating the same, tired talking points that got them nowhere last time. Really, it’s time to pick up some real literature about science and history because the stream of ideological talking points just isn’t working anymore.
