Washington, DC — Brady Dennis reports in The Washington Post that earlier this summer, the folks behind ScienceDebate.org sent the presidential candidates a list of 20 questions that likely won’t garner much airtime in the televised debates this fall.
They asked about climate change, mental health, space exploration, vaccinations, antibiotic-resistant superbugs and the future of U.S. energy.
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump both responded — though Clinton’s answers are twice as long and noticeably more detailed — and you can find their full answers here.
Perhaps the starkest contrast between the candidates, scientifically speaking, involves climate change.
That’s not entirely surprising.
Clinton has embraced the Obama administration’s efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions and slow the effects of global warming and has vowed to push forward in the same direction.
They asked about climate change, mental health, space exploration, vaccinations, antibiotic-resistant superbugs and the future of U.S. energy.
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump both responded — though Clinton’s answers are twice as long and noticeably more detailed — and you can find their full answers here.
Perhaps the starkest contrast between the candidates, scientifically speaking, involves climate change.
That’s not entirely surprising.
Clinton has embraced the Obama administration’s efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions and slow the effects of global warming and has vowed to push forward in the same direction.
Trump repeatedly has said he isn’t “a believer” that humans have played a significant role in the Earth’s changing climate, and he has called the concept of global warming everything from a “hoax” to “bulls—” to a scheme “created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.” (He later said he was joking about the China tweet).
In his response to the ScienceDebate.org questions, Trump’s campaign basically dodged the climate change question, writing that “there is still much that needs to be investigated in the field of ‘climate change.’” (Nearly all climate scientists agree that human activity is contributing to the warming of the planet.)
Trump wrote that perhaps the nation’s “limited financial resources” would be better spent making sure people have clean water, eliminating diseases such as malaria or developing energy sources that reduce dependence on fossil fuels.
Clinton’s campaign wrote that “when it comes to climate change, the science is crystal clear. Climate change is an urgent threat and a defining challenge of our time and its impacts are already being felt at home and around the world.”
Clinton goes on to detail specific goals if she were to take office, such as generating half the nation’s electricity from clean energy sources.
Aside from such obvious differences, however, Trump and Clinton seem to have at least a sliver of common ground when it comes to science and energy issues.
“Nuclear power must be an integral part of energy independence for America,” Trump responded to one question, calling nuclear “a valuable source of energy.”
Clinton wrote that the climate challenges are “too important to limit the tools available in this fight,” and that nuclear power “is one of those tools.”
For Dennis’ full story, click here.
In his response to the ScienceDebate.org questions, Trump’s campaign basically dodged the climate change question, writing that “there is still much that needs to be investigated in the field of ‘climate change.’” (Nearly all climate scientists agree that human activity is contributing to the warming of the planet.)
Trump wrote that perhaps the nation’s “limited financial resources” would be better spent making sure people have clean water, eliminating diseases such as malaria or developing energy sources that reduce dependence on fossil fuels.
Clinton’s campaign wrote that “when it comes to climate change, the science is crystal clear. Climate change is an urgent threat and a defining challenge of our time and its impacts are already being felt at home and around the world.”
Clinton goes on to detail specific goals if she were to take office, such as generating half the nation’s electricity from clean energy sources.
Aside from such obvious differences, however, Trump and Clinton seem to have at least a sliver of common ground when it comes to science and energy issues.
“Nuclear power must be an integral part of energy independence for America,” Trump responded to one question, calling nuclear “a valuable source of energy.”
Clinton wrote that the climate challenges are “too important to limit the tools available in this fight,” and that nuclear power “is one of those tools.”
For Dennis’ full story, click here.
