As a scientist, one of the things that has horrified me the most about the current practices of the Republican Party is their anti-sceince, almost "Dark Ages" thinking. I have previously written about the right wing Intelligent Deception campaign against the teaching of Evolution, and the right wing Denial Lobby that falsely claims that global warming science is "junk science" and that scientists don't agree about whether global warming is real.

Peter Roskam (a personal injury lawyer running against Iraq vet and Democrat Major Tammy Duckworth in the IL-6 CD) is the latest Republican to publicly make these claims.

For the record, according to people I talk to at GISS, a joint NASA/Columbia U program, about 90+% of scientists agree that global warming is happening and the debate now among climatologists really comes down to just how fucked we are and how short our window of opportunity is to mitigate the effects,

But what horrifies me the most is the outright censorship of science that the Republicans are engaging in. The head of GISS, Jim Hansen, went public on 60 Minutes&lt describing the censorship he faces in his scientific reports and lectures from the Bush Administration. Republican Joe Barton (TX-6) threatens global warming scientists with loss of funding and Congressional investigations if they don't toe the Republican denial line on global warming. Hell, the Bush Administration has even quietly removed study of "the Home Planet" from the NASA mission statement, thus potentially hampering more research into climate change.

Scientists are not an easy bunch to rouse. We really do prefer to be locked away from too much human contact and we do prefer to debate things on scientific merit rather than on politics. In a different context my boss was saying exactly that just yesterday.

But now a group of scientists are pissed at the government interference into and censorship of science. These people have formed the organization Scientists and Engineers for America (SEA)." Their advisory board boasts more than a dozen Nobel Laureates and in a few short weeks their membership has grown to over 5000, myself included. Unlike previous science advocacy groups, SEA aims to be involved with elections in much the same way NARAL advocates for choice and LCV advocates for the environment: issue base, not partisan.

As a first step, SEA has proposed a "Scientific Bill of Rights" to outline their advocacy:

1. Federal policy shall be made using the best available science and analysis both from within the government and from the rest of society.
2. The federal government shall never intentionally publish false or misleading scientific information nor post such material on federal websites.
3. Scientists conducting research or analysis with federal funding shall be free to discuss and publish the results of unclassified research after a reasonable period of review without fear of intimidation or adverse personnel action.
4. Federal employees reporting what they believe to be manipulation of federal research and analysis for political or ideological reasons should be free to bring this information to the attention of the public and shall be protected from intimidation, retribution or adverse personnel action by effective enforcement of Whistle Blower laws.
5. No scientists should fear reprisals or intimidation because of the results of their research.
6. Appointments to federal scientific advisory committees shall be based on the candidate’s scientific qualifications, not political affiliation or ideology.
7. The federal government shall not support any science education program that includes instruction in concepts that are derived from ideology and not science.
8. While scientists may elect to withhold methods or studies that might be misused there shall be no federal prohibition on publication of basic research results. Decisions made about blocking the release of information about specific applied research and technologies for reasons of national security shall be the result of a transparent process. Classification decisions shall be made by trained professionals using a clear set of published criteria and there shall be a clear process for challenging decisions and a process for remedying mistakes and abuses of the classification system.</blockquote>

They are currently compiling a list of "Key Races" to focus on to further their advocacy for science. This list is not yet up. But I hope it is an aggressive one targeting people like Roskam and Barton who go out of their way to attack science and scientists.

I also want to mention that two other groups have been around for a long time with the express purpose of fighting political attacks on science. The National Center for Science Education advocates for acurate teaching of evolution in classrooms and against the unscientific Intelligent Deception ruse creationists have come up with. More broadly, the Union of Concerned Scientists advocates on a wide range of issues, including global warming science, opposition to the misuse of antibiotics in animal feed, sound energy policies, etc. I am a member of both groups and highly recommend them.