I tuned into today to some talk station out of NYC when they were discussing science and politics. One of the hosts was going on about the politicalization of science.  "Why can't we just accept what the science is? After all scientist know the truth and politicians just mess it." All of his examples were liberal positions - global warming, fetal stem cells, various foods, etc. His co-hostess suggested that scientists might not all agree on what science actually knows on some of this issues and his response: "I mean real scientists not political hacks"

Very amusing, especially after a day where I was asked to look at something that no one seems to know why it works. For the scientist, that's the fun of the job. Science is all about not knowing and not understanding - and then finding out. Mentally you need to be a mongoose.

 I wonder what he would think of what a nobel laurate told me was the most important thing a scientist could say: "I don't know." His, like Dworkin's creation of a religion of science, is interesting. Is it thar amhuman need for belief will express itself one way or another or a liberal need to have no alternative beliefs around?