Science: It’s So Unfair
Posted in Public Affairs, Money Matters, Science, Technology, Health, wordpress, United States, Opinion, Business on March 3rd, 2010 by Stanford MatthewsPoor Pluto. No, not the Disney character or mythological god but the planet that science demoted from its planet status. Sort of like science being demoted from its former status as something higher than current regard given the AGW scandals. And given this report from earlier in the year it should be no surprise why interest in exploration or organizations like NASA has fallen.
Hubble sees Pluto changing color, ice sheet cover
The report states ‘newly released photos’ but that is only because astronomer Marc Buie waited to announce his ‘findings.’ It is difficult to tell from the AP account if the delay was from fear of being wrong or if it took all that time to perform the analysis. Which raises the natural questions of what do scientists get paid for and how do they perform their tasks relative to the rest of us?
Yes, it’s so unfair. Wondering why photos taken in 2002 took until 2010 to be included in an astronomer’s evaluation of them? But what troubles most people about science is for all the money spent what practical solutions does it serve? Even conceding the point that scientific research is necessary and discoveries or knowledge acquired can take many years to produce, it is just as reasonable to be a little suspicious of how things are done.
For one who has been supportive of science for much of the past as well as a former fan of NASA and other scientific endeavors frequent criticism of the scientific community cannot always be ignored. One simple example should suffice.
Given health issues are dominating the public debate these days one aspect of the topic is rarely discussed. If it is true that American healthcare is the best in the world or second to none why is it that cures for disease are seldom produced yet drugs and procedures to battle human ills litter the landscape?
Although that was largely a rhetorical question here is one answer. If you cure a disease the profit potential diminishes dramatically. It is more profitable to address the symptoms and other temporary conditions than offer a one time cure.
Humans don’t take very good care of themselves and could be to blame for much of their own health problems. The medical industry often expresses prices are great in order to recoup the cost of research. Yet much of that research comes from institutions outside the corporate door. And many other factors influence the state of healthcare.
The final question of this post is for the scientific community. So where are all the cures?
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
A post on this blog suggested it was political theatre of a bipartisan nature. Again, bipartisan meaning anything but its standard definition. Typically it is used for covering the political backside of both parties by mutual consent. And the Pelosi trip may have been a classic example. And you can expect both sides had hopes of a political upside for themselves and their opposition taking a hit. Here’s 
The critical issue these days when discussing political parties should be national security as without effective defense every other debate is moot. The GOP fall from grace preceding two election cycles of defeat merely allowed the continuation of flawed governance. The only difference is party blue rather than party red.
First homeland security princess Janet Napolitano said the systems worked in the Flight 253 incidents. Second, President Obama was uncharacteristically silent as an opportunity to pontificate presented itself. Third, Napolitano initiated damage control for her earlier pathetic appraisal of national security. Fourth, President Obama, for reasons we can imagine, broke his silence on the matter and part of a report from the Obama hijacked VOA News is below.
Sorry Mr President but it appears the only ones concerned about national security are those you and your cronies have labeled violent fringe right wingers who attend tea parties. As far as extra law enforcement goes Barry, there is no extra. There’s what you have and what you use. There’s no extra. Review this if there is something you want to review. See below.
Another event to once again raise the discussion on national security. Not like the status of US national security is ever erased from the American consciousness but one has to wonder if that includes the Obama Administration? The President has been criticized for not being more visible on this and other issues since heading to Hawaii on vacation. His security princess, Napolitano, stated after the Flight 253 incident, the first of two, that ‘the system’ was working properly. That someone was able to board a commercial aircraft and attempt to detonate explosives on final approach contradicts Napolitano’s conclusion. Unless only doing something after the fact is her idea of national security. And even then, simply notifying other commercial aircraft of the conditions on Flight 253 is of little value.
As a final note for this post a political point is in order. Bush bashers frequently express 9/11 happened on the Bush 43 watch so it was his fault. This blog has stated in the past that there is plenty of blame to go around regarding US national security. A couple of things to keep in mind. 9/11 was not conceived, planned or otherwise arranged by terrorists in less than eight months which is the time George W Bush was in office prior to the attack. Before that President Clinton completed two terms in office and posts here as well as information freely available elsewhere indicate some dropping of the ball as regards terrorism and Osama bin Laden, etc.
“A Law repugnant to the Constitution is void.” With these words written by Chief Justice Marshall, the Supreme Court for the first time declared unconstitutional a law passed by Congress and signed by the President. Nothing in the Constitution gave the Court this specific power. Marshall, however, believed that the Supreme Court should have a role equal to those of the other two branches of government.
