In last Thursday's paper, The Oklahoman published a ridiculous editorial that attempted to compare the eugenics movement – a cruel social experiment popularized in the early 1900s that aimed to improve the genetic composition of the human race through selective breeding and the sterilization of targeted "undesirables" like the poor, disabled and minorities – to modern scientific study.
Although the paper doesn't mention the words specifically, it's basically just another attempt by "The State's Most Trusted News" to discredit and cast doubt upon the proven science of global warming – the biggest environmental crisis we'll face as a civilization.
Get your eyes ready to roll...
In policy debates, bowing to "science" can lead down dark paths
AMONG the most intellectually offensive tactics of some activists is to proclaim “science” a cudgel for silencing debate. That's not a new practice, and it's worth noting how acquiescence to such tactics played out in the past.
Throughout much of the first half of the 20th century, the “science” of eugenics was aggressively promoted by prominent politicians, attorneys and medical professionals, particularly political progressives. Darwinian evolution and advances in genetics and biology were cited as scientific justification for a wide range of policies, including forced sterilization.
Yep. It's "intellectually offensive" to go all Thomas Dolby and proclaim "Science" a cudgel for silencing debate," but using a sick social movement of the early 1900s to unfairly discredit science is intellectually brilliant and A-okay! Who cares that eugenics was developed in a time before the advent of technologies, breakthroughs and discoveries that have revolutionized our understanding of the human body and universe around us. It's a totally fair comparison.