Robust and objective science

Alex Berezow and Hank Campbell have written Science Left Behind: Feel-Good Fallacies and the Rise of the Anti-Scientific Left. The disdain the GOP and their followers have for the science, especially of evolution and global climate change, is well known. So a book about similar disdain among liberals would, of course, attract attention.

It attracted the attention of Alison Fairbrother of the Public Trust Project. She read the book and wrote a review for the Washington Spectator (alas, no link). The book covers such topics as genetically engineered salmon, drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the Keystone XL Pipeline, and the plastic BPA in baby bottles. All of these causes are promoted by deep-pocket corporations. In each case Fairbrother found the same thing.

The book's authors claim liberals don't like science because liberals don't automatically embrace the corporate-sponsored science that is produced to "prove" these various causes and products are beneficial (or at least not harmful). Those pesky liberals insist on proper review of environmental impact statements and other documents that force the government to get concurrence from independent sources.

A scientist involved in the FDA review for the GE salmon noted the corporation's research would not have been accepted in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

The Left anti-science? Nope, they're anti sloppy and biased science. They trust robust science that can stand up to objective scrutiny.