• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Scientific American endorses a presidential candidate for the first time in its 175 year history

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
May 30, 2004
27,201
57,087
2,365



Scientific American has never endorsed a presidential candidate in its 175-year history. This year we are compelled to do so. We do not do this lightly.

The evidence and the science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its people—because he rejects evidence and science. The most devastating example is his dishonest and inept response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which cost more than 190,000 Americans their lives by the middle of September. He has also attacked environmental protections, medical care, and the researchers and public science agencies that help this country prepare for its greatest challenges. That is why we urge you to vote for Joe Biden, who is offering fact-based plans to protect our health, our economy and the environment. These and other proposals he has put forth can set the country back on course for a safer, more prosperous and more equitable future.

The pandemic would strain any nation and system, but Trump's rejection of evidence and public health measures have been catastrophic in the U.S. He was warned many times in January and February about the onrushing disease, yet he did not develop a national strategy to provide protective equipment, coronavirus testing or clear health guidelines. Testing people for the virus, and tracing those they may have infected, is how countries in Europe and Asia have gained control over their outbreaks, saved lives, and successfully reopened businesses and schools. But in the U.S., Trump claimed, falsely, that “anybody that wants a test can get a test.” That was untrue in March and remained untrue through the summer. Trump opposed $25 billion for increased testing and tracing that was in a pandemic relief bill as late as July. These lapses accelerated the spread of disease through the country—particularly in highly vulnerable communities that include people of color, where deaths climbed disproportionately to those in the rest of the population.


It wasn't just a testing problem: if almost everyone in the U.S. wore masks in public, it could save about 66,000 lives by the beginning of December, according to projections from the University of Washington School of Medicine. Such a strategy would hurt no one. It would close no business. It would cost next to nothing. But Trump and his vice president flouted local mask rules, making it a point not to wear masks themselves in public appearances. Trump has openly supported people who ignored governors in Michigan and California and elsewhere as they tried to impose social distancing and restrict public activities to control the virus. He encouraged governors in Florida, Arizona and Texas who resisted these public health measures, saying in April—again, falsely—that “the worst days of the pandemic are behind us” and ignoring infectious disease experts who warned at the time of a dangerous rebound if safety measures were loosened.

And of course, the rebound came, with cases across the nation rising by 46 percent and deaths increasing by 21 percent in June. The states that followed Trump's misguidance posted new daily highs and higher percentages of positive tests than those that did not. By early July several hospitals in Texas were full of COVID-19 patients. States had to close up again, at tremendous economic cost. About 31 percent of workers were laid off a second time, following the giant wave of unemployment—more than 30 million people and countless shuttered businesses—that had already decimated the country. At every stage, Trump has rejected the unmistakable lesson that controlling the disease, not downplaying it, is the path to economic reopening and recovery.

Trump repeatedly lied to the public about the deadly threat of the disease, saying it was not a serious concern and “this is like a flu” when he knew it was more lethal and highly transmissible, according to his taped statements to journalist Bob Woodward. His lies encouraged people to engage in risky behavior, spreading the virus further, and have driven wedges between Americans who take the threat seriously and those who believe Trump's falsehoods. The White House even produced a memo attacking the expertise of the nation's leading infectious disease physician, Anthony Fauci, in a despicable attempt to sow further distrust.

Trump's reaction to America's worst public health crisis in a century has been to say “I don't take responsibility at all.” Instead he blamed other countries and his White House predecessor, who left office three years before the pandemic began.

But Trump's refusal to look at the evidence and act accordingly extends beyond the virus. He has repeatedly tried to get rid of the Affordable Care Act while offering no alternative; comprehensive medical insurance is essential to reduce illness. Trump has proposed billion-dollar cuts to the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, agencies that increase our scientific knowledge and strengthen us for future challenges. Congress has countermanded his reductions. Yet he keeps trying, slashing programs that would ready us for future pandemics and withdrawing from the World Health Organization. These and other actions increase the risk that new diseases will surprise and devastate us again.


Trump also keeps pushing to eliminate health rulesfrom the Environmental Protection Agency, putting people at more risk for heart and lung disease caused by pollution. He has replaced scientists on agency advisory boards with industry representatives. In his ongoing denial of reality, Trump has hobbled U.S. preparations for climate change, falsely claiming that it does not exist and pulling out of international agreements to mitigate it. The changing climate is already causing a rise in heat-related deaths and an increase in severe storms, wildfires and extreme flooding.

Joe Biden, in contrast, comes prepared with plans to control COVID-19, improve health care, reduce carbon emissions and restore the role of legitimate science in policy making. He solicits expertise and has turned that knowledge into solid policy proposals.

On COVID-19, he states correctly that “it is wrong to talk about ‘choosing' between our public health and our economy.... If we don't beat the virus, we will never get back to full economic strength.” Biden plans to ramp up a national testing board, a body that would have the authority to command both public and private resources to supply more tests and get them to all communities. He also wants to establish a Public Health Job Corps of 100,000 people, many of whom have been laid off during the pandemic crisis, to serve as contact tracers and in other health jobs. He will direct the Occupational Health and Safety Administration to enforce workplace safety standards to avoid the kind of deadly outbreaks that have occurred at meat-processing plants and nursing homes. While Trump threatened to withhold money from school districts that did not reopen, regardless of the danger from the virus, Biden wants to spend $34 billion to help schools conduct safe in-person instruction as well as remote learning.


Biden is getting advice on these public health issues from a group that includes David Kessler, epidemiologist, pediatrician and former U.S. Food and Drug Administration chief; Rebecca Katz, immunologist and global health security specialist at Georgetown University; and Ezekiel Emanuel, bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania. It does not include physicians who believe in aliens and debunked virus therapies, one of whom Trump has called “very respected” and “spectacular.”

Biden has a family and caregiving initiative, recognizing this as key to a sustained public health and economic recovery. His plans include increased salaries for child care workers and construction of new facilities for children because the inability to afford quality care keeps workers out of the economy and places enormous strains on families.


On the environment and climate change, Biden wants to spend $2 trillion on an emissions-free power sector by 2035, build energy-efficient structures and vehicles, push solar and wind power, establish research agencies to develop safe nuclear power and carbon capture technologies, and more. The investment will produce two million jobs for U.S. workers, his campaign claims, and the climate plan will be partly paid by eliminating Trump's corporate tax cuts. Historically disadvantaged communities in the U.S. will receive 40 percent of these energy and infrastructure benefits.

It is not certain how many of these and his other ambitions Biden will be able to accomplish; much depends on laws to be written and passed by Congress. But he is acutely aware that we must heed the abundant research showing ways to recover from our present crises and successfully cope with future challenges.

Although Trump and his allies have tried to create obstacles that prevent people from casting ballots safely in November, either by mail or in person, it is crucial that we surmount them and vote. It's time to move Trump out and elect Biden, who has a record of following the data and being guided by science.
 

Sign

Member
Jun 4, 2012
1,196
2,520
745
Nah, I'm not voting for the idiot that:

Voted for Iraq, and NAFTA.
Supports the terrorists in BLM and antifa.
Blames America for everything.
That wants to reward illegal aliens with amnesty while forcing Americans to pay for their healthcare.
Wants to make zoning a federal issue.
That wants to make us dependent on foreign energy.

And a million other things.

Voting Trump. Scientific American can keep their TDS.
 
Last edited:

KINGMOKU

Member
May 16, 2005
8,223
6,997
1,700
You have got to be kidding me. :lollipop_pensive:

Albert Einstein is rolling over in his grave. Scientific American, a peer reviewed subscription based popular science magazine.

Laura Helmuth is an American science journalist and the Editor in Chief of Scientific American. She was formerly the Health and Science editor at The Washington Post. From 2016 to 2018, she served as the President of the National Association of Science Writers.

Subscription-canceled
 

Bolivar687

Gold Member
Jun 13, 2014
6,564
6,283
800
USA
The fact that they haven't endorsed anyone in 175 years shows how political discourse has corrupted every last corner of public life.

Echoing Biden's national mask mandate is a real head scratcher. It shows these people have no place near policy and that the mask means something much more to them than just slowing the spread. It's about extensive control over our personal lives that the federal government is very plainly not supposed to have.
 
Last edited:

JordanN

Member
Apr 21, 2012
22,333
15,223
1,225
Brampton, Ontario
The most devastating example is his willfully ignorant response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which cost more than 190,000 Americans their lives.
The USA is such a huge place, if you actually look at a map, the cases themselves appear to be area specific.

Maybe it was never a Presidential problem because there are states where Covid barely exists compared to others?



 
Last edited:

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
15,895
29,157
870
39
Takes me back to the 1980s and hearing about how we would run out of oil by 2000.

It’s funny how science builds this veneer of impartiality and objectivity yet these are also doomsday apocalypse cultists telling us the world will end.

The medical and scientific establishment proved this year they have no clue what the fuck they are talking about and are partisan hacks who let politics get in the way of doing their jobs and are practically useless when we need them the most.
 
Last edited:

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
15,895
29,157
870
39
It is funny tho all these scientists bitching about masks and why didn’t Trump save everyone and stop this global pandemic single handedly?

Hey scientists how come you haven’t come up with a single solution beyond screaming about masks? Where is your brilliant intellect? Trump isn’t a scientist. You are. Where is your problem solving now? Mind turning it on and doing some work for a world in crisis? Or you just gonna cry and point fingers like a bitch?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: Teletraan1 and tfur

NorwayBot

Member
Aug 3, 2019
131
344
285
If it's not painfully obvious for people by now, the election is about the following;

Trump is removing the "toys" from the globalist elite, the "toys" they've amassed the last 25 years by "selling" out their own nations.

The globalist elite don't like that -and they are willing to "sacrifice" anything to keep it from happening - even their own credibility.
 

Kreen101

Member
Sep 4, 2019
156
289
275
Of course they want Biden to win: he'll just delegate all decision-making to them. Great way to end up governing a country without going to the trouble of being democratically elected.

Here in Canada, our great scientists contradicted themselves constantly throughout the pandemic, first discouraging the use masks, then making them mandatory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pr0cs and NorwayBot

Arkam

Member
Jan 21, 2012
3,491
2,415
750
Here, Now and maybe later
Lets be real. "Science" has been politicized for a years and is used as gospel by many. Instead of the set of observations that can be used to make future hypothetical models. These models are inherently flawed as they can only be based on the known (ie Historical evidence) so it discounts all the things that will change and ultimately make the model inaccurate.

Most people who throw around "science" are reading it like a dogmatic text instead of a moving set of facts that are just as likely to be untrue tomorrow as they are to be true.
 

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
15,895
29,157
870
39
"Science!" (but absolutely not the scientific method) is the new religion.
the scientific method of experimenting and testing hypothesis and peer review is no longer ok. just asking questions is seen as suspect.

science is basically anti-intellectual at this point.

either you agree with science dogma or you are a heretic that must be cast out.

it's every bit as zealous as the most rabid evangelical sects. except with a much larger platform.

they shot their wad when they called racism "a health concern". that is not a scientific statement, it is unthinking postmodern idpol bullshit.
 
Last edited:

Zefah

Gold Member
Jan 7, 2007
40,095
14,178
1,585
the scientific method of testing and peer review is no longer ok. just asking questions is seen as suspect.

either you agree with science dogma or you are a heretic that must be cast out.

it's every bit as zealous as the most rabid evangelical sects. except with a much larger platform.
And it's only going to get worse if Critical Race Theory and Intersectional Feminism continue to infect the science departments in Universities.
 

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
5,355
6,017
675
And those science people wonder why people don't believe in there scientific data. Because its riddled with bias.

Always told you science was a religion, and here we go.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: prag16

dionysus

Yaldog
May 12, 2007
7,145
1,649
1,450
Texaa
And people wonder why academics, especially in the social sciences, might be directed to only do research that fits a certain ideological bias. With editors this partisan, who is going to pursue research that will strengthen conservative arguments?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: prag16 and Sign

prag16

Member
Jul 12, 2012
11,506
3,078
835
For fuck's sake. That's a LONG diatribe to say basically "orange man bad".

If it wasn't already, science or scientism or whatever you want to call it has officially become a religion.
 

Paracelsus

Member
Jun 24, 2007
10,066
2,432
1,370
They don't seem to understand that when they gut an institution, fill it with antifa and use it to preach their dogma, people will immediately notice and start ignoring them.
If you can't trust science because it's politically charged, that's really bad.
 
Last edited:

TindalosPup

Member
Nov 1, 2019
604
1,232
475
The Middle of Nowhere
Lets be real. "Science" has been politicized for a years and is used as gospel by many. Instead of the set of observations that can be used to make future hypothetical models. These models are inherently flawed as they can only be based on the known (ie Historical evidence) so it discounts all the things that will change and ultimately make the model inaccurate.

Most people who throw around "science" are reading it like a dogmatic text instead of a moving set of facts that are just as likely to be untrue tomorrow as they are to be true.
This is something I think a lot of people don't realize when they argue science, nothing in science is supposed to be permanent or indisputable, ever.

Science is losing (has lost) it's way
 
  • Like
Reactions: #Phonepunk#

Boss Mog

Member
Dec 12, 2013
6,770
8,691
900
The NYPD also never endorse candidates but they endorsed Trump. BLM/Antifa terrorists are a much more immediate threat than global warming, you'd think a "scientist" would be smart enough to know that.
 

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
15,895
29,157
870
39
Trump also keeps pushing to eliminate health rules from the Environmental Protection Agency, putting people at more risk for heart and lung disease caused by pollution.
oh no! i bet no scientists were involved in setting up the corporate infrastructure that causes pollution! no scientists were involved in engineering smokestacks or deciding on the appropriate industrial emissions. no scientists touted the benefits of plastics to improve daily life. no scientists collaborated with the military to design the internet or develop computers or nuclear weapons. no scientists went along with corporations who hid that cancer causing chemicals were in all our plastic drink holders. nope! no scientists ever did anything wrong!

never happened! it's all Trump's fault once again!

that's the thing about this climate scam, the same exact people who looked the other way for decades while polluting the Earth are now the same exact people we need to give money to fix the problem they created.

it's like, to buy into all of this, you first have to admit that scientists have fucked us over to the edge of "extinction". then you have to say, "Well what if i give them trillions of dollars, will they fix things?"

utterly moronic.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: prag16

Jonsoncao

Member
Dec 10, 2006
3,591
421
1,270
Irvine, CA
I grew up reading Scientific American, and it was one of the major reason why I chose to purse a CS+Stat PhD.

This article is utterly disgraceful...while SA chose to ignore the fact that the obese orange admin has been pouring money into quantum science, space, machine learning.

Human cannot revert the climate change and the earth is simply cleansing the vermins (human) through normal climate fluctuation of quaternary glaciation. It is time to move on and look for a new planet. No doubt the sleepy joek will waste precious tax payer money on useless things like BLM, illegal immigrants.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: zombrex

drganon

Member
Sep 20, 2019
1,240
1,985
410
What could be more scientifically sound than voting for the slimey career politician who's going senile.
 

ChuckeRearmed

Member
Jan 31, 2018
1,058
627
325
Dems throw everything into politics.
Of course in the end it just damages the credibility.
 
Last edited:

Spokker

Member
May 31, 2011
1,951
738
780
Rhetoric aside, the government's response would have been the same under any president. The response is baked in, basically. This was way back in March


The administration of President Donald Trump was tripped up by government rules and conventions, former officials and public health experts say. Instead of drafting the private sector early on to develop tests, as South Korea did, U.S. health officials relied, as is customary, on test kits prepared by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, some of which proved faulty. Then, sticking to its time-consuming vetting procedures, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration didn’t approve tests other than the CDC’s until Feb. 29, more than five weeks after discussions with outside labs had begun.

Meanwhile, in the absence of enough kits, the CDC insisted for weeks on narrow criteria for testing, recommending it only when a person had recently been to China or other hot spots or had contact with someone known to be infected. As a result, the federal government failed to screen an untold number of Americans and missed opportunities to contain the spread, clinicians and public health experts say.

South Korea took a risk, releasing briskly vetted tests, then circling back later to spot check their effectiveness. By contrast, the United States’ FDA said it wanted to ensure, upfront, that the tests were accurate before they went out to millions of Americans.
Hilary would have run into the same problems above. Would she have gone against government rules, conventions and customs?

Aside from that, Trump has been praised by Governor Gavin Newsom for his assistance on wildfires and COVID. Despite what Trump says he believes about the science, he has been there when governors needed him.


The liberal Democrat - the leader in the headquarters of the Resistance - has taken to singing Trump's praises, and he even used the Republican president's campaign slogan Thursday: "Promise made, promise kept," he said, thanking Trump for sending California testing swabs. He previously called Trump "thoughtful," "responsive" and "collaborative."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: #Phonepunk#

#Phonepunk#

Member
Sep 4, 2018
15,895
29,157
870
39
Trump has been praised by Governor Gavin Newsom for his assistance on wildfires and COVID
oh yeah there is that video of Cuomo also saying "Thank you so much, the federal gov't is a tremendous help" at a press conference mere hours before claiming the exact opposite.

they are so full of shit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spokker

Johnny Silver

Member
Oct 24, 2018
168
269
270
"Science!" (but absolutely not the scientific method) is the new religion.
Exactly. They are using the reputation that "science" has (which in reality is the scientific method, but they ignore it when they say "science") in order to justify their political agendas.

In other words, "science" has substituted religion as the main tool used to make the voices of the elites as divine law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zefah