In Washington and cities around the country last weekend, events labeled The March for Science should have been labeled The March Against Trump. Few Republicans were invited and marchers carried signs that urged “Resist” and other anti-Trump slogans. Read the rest at Fox News.
It is frustrating to me that many Americans are ignorant of the crimes of socialist and communist movements. Read the rest at USA Today.
Reagan intervened to rescue Poland from authoritarianism. Trump should do the same thing. Read the rest at Foreign Policy.
It’s a tale fit for a sci-fi novel: 21 diplomats in Cuba suffer from symptoms like hearing loss and brain damage. And Cuba stands to lose a lot. Read the rest at USA Today.
A study shows they would give up the chance to win money to avoid hearing ideas they disagree with. So much for the champions of enlightenment. Read the rest at New Scientist.
The environmental activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a vaccine skeptic, told reporters Tuesday in the lobby of Trump Tower that the president-elect has asked him to lead a commission “to make sure we have scientific integrity in the vaccine process for efficacy and safety effects.” Mr. Kennedy also suggested that Donald Trump “has some doubts about the current vaccine policies” and that “we ought to be debating the science.” This is insane. Read the rest at The Wall Street Journal.
A jury in St. Louis awarded a woman over $70 million last month because her lawyers convinced a jury that talcum (baby) powder caused her ovarian cancer. This is the third jackpot verdict issued by a jury in that city against Johnson & Johnson. Since sharks are smelling blood in the water, surely more lawsuits will follow. Read the rest at USA Today.
FB removed the page of a pro-GMO advocate but allows the controversial Dr. Oz to promote miracle cures. Read the rest at National Review.
The Journal of the American Medical Assn. recently published a very unusual article: a scientific study authored by a sitting president of the United States. That’s never happened before. Read the rest at the Los Angeles Times.
This article was originally posted on RealClearScience.
The 2016 presidential election has been conspicuously light on substance, particularly on matters of science and policy. In an effort to provide some clarity to voters who place an emphasis on science, we have created a chart that scores the presumptive Republican and Democratic Party candidates on key scientific issues. Please keep in mind three major caveats. Continue reading