We can always count on the Neanderthals on the Oklahoman
Editorial Board to provide us with a good laugh every now and then. An opinion published July 20 was titled: “In
policy, debates, bowing to “science” can lead down dark paths.”
The opening sentence states that the use of “science” is an
intellectually offensive tactic of some activists to stifle debate. Reading through the opinion, the Oklahoman
Editorial Board talks about how the eugenics, or ethnic cleansing, was declared
a science by then associate surgeon general Dr. W. C. Rucker of the U.S. Public
Health Service. The article proceeds to
demonstrate how this set a precedence for sterilization of inmates in prisons
and mental asylum. It was even
perpetuated into the 1970’s when American Indian women were sterilized at an
OKC federal facility.
Read this quote from the article:
“It took the Nazi Holocaust to discredit eugenics. Before
then, critics were dismissed as backward, anti-science zealots.”
Leave it to the Oklahoma Editorial Board to say the
Holocaust was good for something. As
typical, the OEB does not cite any references that one can follow to read more
about these subjects. What did Rucker
show as his evidence to support his eugenics?
Did other doctors or scientists support his findings? The article does not say. It implies that once Rucker made his
declaration, the rest of the country followed like mindless rats seduced to
follow the Pied Piper.
Rather than give other examples of “science leading us to
the Dark Side”, the OEB latches on to this one thread and doesn’t let go, as if
feeling the need to beat it into our brains to make the point. And all the examples are limited to Oklahoma.
The intro to the second to last paragraph is the most
worrisome and chilling, that this board has a voice that is reaching out to the
mindless rats:
“Science is one thing.
People’s interpretation of science is something else.” Then, “policy proposals based on debatable interpretations
of science should certainly be debated.”
Didn’t they warn us at the beginning about debates with
science?
Although never specified in the article, one can read
between the lines and see the inference to the present “debate” over global
warming. Never fans of science, Gov.
Failing, Pruitt and other Republicans, in Oklahoma and nation-wide deny climate
change and global warming vehemently. They
cling to their faith and beliefs and shun the evils of science.
Scientists can be wrong, which is why we have peer
reviews. Nobody is ‘debating’ the issue
of climate change, i.e. no one has presented data to show our climate is NOT
changing. NASA and NOAA have submitted
decades of data that have been researched and reviewed by both sides of the
debate and have reached one conclusion: Earth is warming up.
The OEB has a point that one cannot take one person’s word
as proof. Yes, got it. We went to a dark place then. But that has changed. We’re in the 21st century now,
guys. People are watching each other
like Orwellian Big Brothers. It’s okay
to be skeptical but not to be obstinate and suspicious.
No comments:
Post a Comment