Obama's Science Teacher Training Initiative is Politicized Science

by Lewis Loflin

"Obama also called on the 200,000 scientists who work for the federal government to help by speaking at schools and participating in hands-on projects to help stoke a youngster's curiosity in science."

January 6, 2010 AP

What does he mean exactly science or politics cloaked in science? (Climate change.) Democrats constantly try to employ "science" to justify many onerous political positions. This disturbing piece from (a far left website) is a case in point:

One of the great political shifts in the past decade has been the move of scientists toward the Democratic Party, a casualty of the Republican Party's war on reality. It's not about politics for scientists (total nonsense yes it is), it's about the fact that only one party accepts scientific findings on everything from global warming to evolutionary theory to what does and doesn't prevent pregnancy.

Only 6 percent of scientists identify as Republican, whereas 55 percent identify as Democratic. In October of 2012, 68 Nobel-winning scientists co-signed a strong endorsement of Obama, saying the President "has delivered on his promise to renew our faith in science-based decision making."...

Democrats and the far-left in general hold much of the public in contempt and as inferior. People do believe in climate change, but the left has not made the case based on EMPIRICAL science man is largely responsible. Years of failed computer models, which do not constitute EMPIRICAL proof tends to create skepticism.

Climate change money 2013.
Reasons why climate scientists vote for Obama and support his position.

The report the above was derived from reads like a virtual blueprint for the takeover of every aspect of our lives and then we are somehow stupid to question it? We are talking increasingly massive levels of wealth and power transferred to government control.

The report is at

Also see:Democrats Disdain of Voters Hides Religious Crusade

What the hell does "faith" have to do with science? This will compromise science as the promise of public funding and personal political power will reflect the science being presented. Too many scientists are also present at American universities virtual Marxist hellholes where dissent and skepticism on anything is crushed like bug.

The other problem is research funding is tied into politics and pure science has little priority. While the military gets a lot of R&D funding pure science is another case. But science to underwrite political agendas gets billions to support the agenda.

Any scientist taking the wrong political or social position will face retaliation - many colleges believe the Constitution doesn't even apply at their institutions.

Skepticism is the basis of science, unless it's politically incorrect. For example evolutionary biology shows idea people do differ by race, ability, IQ, etc. is rejected and even race itself has been redefined as "social construct" was invented by not by empirical science but by social scientists leading to ruthless political suppression of research that disproves their position. And that goes for many other subjects such as so-called "climate change".

Empirical science has been replaced by opinion, data replaced or manufactured by computer modeling. The opinions of scientists is not empirical science. The problem has become is empirical science is being buried by social science much of it Marxist or far left. If scientists prefer playing politics then we have a right and a duty to question their ethics.

Oddly the President and Congress refuse to stop the destructive business tactics used to fire and replace American engineers and scientists with cheaper imported labor. It's astounding the number of scientists employed by government while R & D jobs flow overseas to cut labor costs.

There is no labor shortage in this country, simply a desire by business to boost profits at the expense of workers and the nation. But is Asia the big deal American business claims or is it simply cheap labor? Here is the Asian reality:

Chinese and Indian Engineers are low quality:

Even Asia's much-touted numerical advantage is less than it seems. China supposedly graduates 600,000 engineering majors each year, India another 350,000. The United States trails with only 70,000 engineering graduates annually. Although these numbers suggest an Asian edge in generating brainpower, they are thoroughly misleading.

Half of China's engineering graduates and two thirds of India's have associate degrees. Once quality is factored in, Asia's lead disappears altogether. A much-cited 2005 McKinsey Global Institute study reports that human resource managers in multinational companies consider only 10 percent of Chinese engineers and 25 percent of Indian engineers as even "employable," compared with 81 percent of American engineers.

China is racist:

Chinese society has its historically, highly distinctive position on race, where about 92 per cent of the population believe that they are of one race, and therefore, from which is the lack of a conception of, or respect for, difference that flows from other minorities. The deep sense of China as a unitary civilisation, together with a pervasive belief in Han superiority, leaves little room for the claims of other cultural groups.

Massive poverty persists:

Asia is nowhere near closing its economic and military gap with the West. The region produces roughly 30 percent of global economic output, but because of its huge population, its per capita GDP is only $5,800, compared with $48,000 in the United States...

Pollution and resource shortages:

Environmental and natural resource constraints could also prove crippling. Pollution is worsening Asia's shortage of fresh water while air pollution exacts a terrible toll on health (it kills almost 400,000 people each year in China alone). Without revolutionary advances in alternative energy, Asia could face a severe energy crunch. Climate change could devastate the region's agriculture.