On cars, old, new and future; science & technology; vintage airplanes, computer flight simulation of them; Sherlockiana; our English language; travel; and other stuff
THE EDITORS OF Scientific American declared, “We’ve never backed a presidential candidate in our 175-year history—until now.”
“This year,” the editors wrote in Scientific American, October 2020, “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 American their lives by the middle of September.”
The editors continued, “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,” they summarized, “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 editors cited Trump’s “rejection of evidence and public health measures that have been catastrophic in the U.S.” In March 2020, he told the country that “anybody that wants a test can get a test.” This was a lie back then, and remains a lie through the summer.
Scientific American wrote, “… 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.”
As has been evident repeatedly, “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 [Democratic] governors in Michigan and California and elsewhere as they tried to impose social distancing and restrict public activities to control the virus. He encouraged [Republican] 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 of course,” Scientific American wrote, “the rebound came, with cases across the nation rising by 46 percent and deaths increasing by 21 percent in June.”
Trump’s lies, Scientific American wrote, “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.”
Alas, this division has resulted in mask behavior predicated by political preference, rather than facts.
Scientific American continued, “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.”
More recent news corroborates this lamentable Trumpery: The president took issue when Dr. Robert R. Redfield, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, told a Senate committee that a vaccine would not be widely available until the middle of next year and that masks may even be more important than a vaccine.
“I think he made a mistake when he said that,” Trump claimed. “It’s just incorrect information… under no circumstance will it be as late as the doctor said.”
Wrote The New York Times, “The public scolding of Dr. Redfield was only the latest but perhaps the starkest instance when the president has rejected not just the policy advice of his public health officials but the facts and information that they provided.”
Attorney General William Barr supported this Trumpery with an absurd politicizing that lockdown strategies to prevent coronavirus spread were “the greatest intrusion on civil liberties” in history “other than slavery.”
Scientific American concluded with, “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.”
I agree wholeheartedly. ds
© Dennis Simanaitis, SimanaitisSays.com, 2020
Thank you, Dennis.
I’m not a scientist. Heck, I don’t even have a college degree. But I’m disappointed that so many Americans have turned their back on science in favor of their baser instincts. Do we need another Sputnik moment to wake us up?
A good point. I believe our “Sputnik moment” (an excellent term) comes on November 3.