Mid adult male scientist reading scientific data in a laboratory.
Does anyone else see the irony in the Nature journal editors proclaiming to defend science while blatantly endorsing political candidates? Todd Myers from the Washington Policy Center joins me as we break down how these so-called champions of scientific integrity only seem to care about evidence when it suits their narrative.
For the second presidential election in a row, Nature threw its support behind candidates against Donald Trump. Their excuse? They claim it’s to uphold the integrity of science. But let’s be real—what they’re really doing is politicizing science, making it harder for the average American to trust the very research they rely on.
Science should be about facts and evidence, not about who’s in office. Yet here we are, watching as the editors of Nature create a toxic brew of politics and science that leaves the public questioning the validity of research. This isn’t just damaging to their journal; it undermines the entire scientific community.
When scientists preach the importance of following the evidence, yet the leaders of major journals engage in political endorsements, it sends a mixed message. The hypocrisy here is staggering, and it contributes to the growing perception that science is just another tool in the political toolbox.
We’re looking at a dangerous trend where feelings trump facts, and the implications are far-reaching. Tune in to hear why this matters for every single one of us who values real scientific inquiry over political theatrics.
The post Nature Journal Chooses Politics Over Science appeared first on The Lars Larson Show.
This post was originally published on here
