In a first, the 175 year old magazine Scientific American has endorsed a candidate for President of the United States! see Scientific American Endorses Joe Biden Citing the now clear evidence that Trump's policies have "badly damaged the U.S. and its people," they have endorsed Democratic nominee Joe Biden for president.
The editors point out that Trump's response to Covid-19 has been "dishonest and inept." They also point to the fact that his administration has discarded many environmental protections and has actively sought to dismantle the Affordable Care Act. In short, they claim that Trump's rejection of science, common sense public health measures and global warming have endangered this republic; and this blogger completely agrees with that assessment.
Moreover, the magazine's editors point to Trump's own record to back up their claims. Their opinion, however, is not based entirely on the very negative nature of Trump's performance on these issues. They go on to cite several key provisions of Biden's plans that would improve the dismal circumstances in which the nation finds itself at present.
The editors conclude: "It's time to move Trump out and elect Biden, who has a record of following the data and being guided by science." I wholeheartedly agree - We desperately need a leader who will be guided by scientific evidence and common sense!
The only authority Scientific American has is where to place the ads in their magazine. They don't do science. They sell ads and promote narratives to their subscribers who are willing to pay for it.
ReplyDeleteScientific American is a widely respected magazine that has published articles from scientists of the caliber of Albert Einstein, Linus Pauling and J.R. Oppenheimer.
ReplyDeleteAlbert Einstein, Linus Pauling and J.R. Oppenheimer are all highly and widely respected scientists. Publishers don't do science. Why make science political?
ReplyDeleteYes, that's the question: Why would a magazine devoted to science which has NEVER endorsed a candidate for president in its 175 year history feel compelled to endorse one this time around? What could have persuaded them to cast off their long-standing neutrality? Biden's scientific credentials? Could it be that the current president's anti-science stances have provoked this response? This isn't rocket science!
Delete"What could have persuaded them to cast off their long-standing neutrality?"
DeleteIt's just a magazine. Maybe for the same reason that most, if not all, newspapers in 2016 endorsed the most corrupt candidate in American history for POTUS. Special interests. Anybody, if you're rich enough and connected, can buy a magazine or newspaper and editorialize anything they want. I've read that article and they did a whole lot of cherry-picking while ignoring vast amounts of data that would counter their narrative, which is "orange man bad." Gaslighting galore. I could counter it but I don't know if you would appreciate the bantz. ;)
Who will Scientific American endorse when Biden drops out? Anybody but "Blumpf"?
Let scientists do science.