Time for the last compilation of pre-election news from campuses on the campaign trail collected in Overnight News Digest on Daily Kos.
I'll begin with this pair of articles from
Overnight News Digest: Science Saturday (2012 Nobel Prizes edition) about the two major party candidates' planks on energy, environment, and space. I was planning on making these a centerpiece of a response to
Kunstler's kvetching on his blog about how
the major party candidates were
ignoring the real problems of the country. Instead, I used the
minor party debate as a reply that someone, if not Obama and Romney, was attempting to do what Kunstler wanted.
Firist, Arizona State University asks
Whose science and tech platform is better?
October 6, 2012
As the election nears, much focus is dedicated to the presidential campaign platforms on the economy and the federal budget. Both candidates publicly champion the advancement of science and technology, and recognize scientific progress as a cornerstone of the American economy and way of life. However, minimal attention is given to the specifics of the science and tech platforms.
ASU physicist and author Lawrence Krauss is helping to draw attention to these specifics via a two-part series on Future Tense at Slate magazine.
The first article, Bombing the Test, touches on climate change and the environment, with the majority focused on the current state of the United States' nuclear weapon arsenal and missile defense.
...
In a second piece, Krauss asks, “Whose Space Exploration Policy Is Better—Obama’s or Romney’s?"
As a scientist, environmentalist, and space enthusiast, the answers to these questions are quite important to me, although if the GOP were serious about any of them, they'd have nominated either Huntsman or
Gingrich, who has a clear, consistent, but wrong platform on energy, an interest in science, and
a love of space exploration. Even so, he would still have made it easy for me to vote for Obama.
The energy debate, which was hidden inside Slate's explanation of the dueling positions of the major parties, became more explicit in this piece from the University of Colorado, Denver:
Students speak their mind in energy policy debate
Natural gas production also a hot topic at third annual Energy Moving Forward forum
By Chris Casey
October 12, 2012
DENVER -- Just hours before the vice presidential candidates sparred in a lively debate on Thursday night, barely touching on energy policy, an equally spirited discussion struck on that very topic, courtesy of the third annual Energy Moving Forward forum.
A panel exchanged partisan blows in "The Future We Want: Student Perspectives on Energy Policy and its Ramifications," part of the half-day conference held in the Terrace Room at the University of Colorado Denver. About 200 business professionals attended.
...
The Republican side criticized President Obama's "all-of-the-above" energy policy, saying it obstructs oil and gas production with unnecessary regulations and squanders largess on the renewables sector. The Democrats argued that renewables are the energy of the future and that leaving energy regulation to individual states muddles accountability and imperils the environment.
That last paragraph pretty much sums up the debate. I'm on the Democrats' side on this one, while I think the Republicans are being a bunch of fossil fools. Just the same it's worth reading the rest of the report to see the talking points and supporting details of both sides.
Follow over the jump for two more stories from
Overnight News Digest: Science Saturday (Sandy's aftermath edition), including press releases about a book describing the psychology of extremism and a hotline for people who think they've been denied the right or opportunity to vote.