What If..

[Hans Tucker (Hans)]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/04...oes-viral.html

I wonder what Australia would be like if we had political leaders that weren't just bankers or lawyers...maybe a leader that had a science background. Would Australia be any better or worse off?

[janoskiss (Steve H)]

Ah, the Just Intruder. I don't know enough about his politics but I've heard good things from him. He may just be a smooth operator, but I hope he's more than that. <3 Canada. Hope to visit one day.

[kittenshark (Cheryl-Ann Tan)]

But what if said scientist was also morally bankrupt?

[janoskiss (Steve H)]

Originally Posted by kittenshark

But what if said scientist was also morally bankrupt?

Not sure how you mean exactly but fellow scientists and peer review would take care of them. No real scientist can pretend to contribute anything significant and not be exposed if they are a fraud. This video sums up how it works (and occasionally fails in the shorter term):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLlA1w4OZWQ

[rrussell1962]

Tried that in the UK. Margaret Thatcher had a degree in Chemistry from Oxford and worked as an industrial Chemist (food, actually I think) before turning to law and politics.

[janoskiss (Steve H)]

... Angela Merkel was a physical chemist (aka chemical physicist) with a PhD.

[julianh72 (Julian)]

Originally Posted by janoskiss

... Angela Merkel was a physical chemist (aka chemical physicist) with a PhD.

My sister has a PhD in Chemical Physics; she gets HIGHLY offended when someone "accuses" her of being a Physical Chemist! (Although I still have trouble working out where the boundaries are - and I can't even understand the half-page abstract from her PhD Thesis.)

Chemical physics is a subdiscipline of chemistry and physics that investigates physicochemical phenomena using techniques from atomic and molecular physics and condensed matter physics; it is the branch of physics that studies chemical processes from the point of view of physics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_physics

Physical chemistry is the study of macroscopic, atomic, subatomic, and particulate phenomena in chemical systems in terms of laws and concepts of physics.

Physical chemistry, in contrast to chemical physics, is predominantly (but not always) a macroscopic or supra-molecular science, as the majority of the principles on which physical chemistry was founded are concepts related to the bulk rather than on molecular/atomic structure alone (for example, chemical equilibrium and colloids).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_chemistry

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by Hans Tucker

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/04...oes-viral.html

I wonder what Australia would be like if we had political leaders that weren't just bankers or lawyers...maybe a leader that had a science background. Would Australia be any better or worse off?

Vote for me and find out....

[lazjen (Chris)]

Our system of representation, while better than many alternatives, still isn't good enough.

Have a look here: https://voteflux.org/ I think ideas proposed on that site have some merit. I'd certainly like to see how it would go.

[Octane (Humayun)]

Check out Canada's ministry.

H

[janoskiss (Steve H)]

Originally Posted by julianh72

My sister has a PhD in Chemical Physics; she gets HIGHLY offended when someone "accuses" her of being a Physical Chemist! (Although I still have trouble working out where the boundaries are - and I can't even understand the half-page abstract from her PhD Thesis.)

There are no boundaries or if there are they are very blurry. If your sister gets offended, she needs to lighten up. It's a blessing that she can pass for both because it means she will be accepted by and have the confidence of scientists from both major disciplines.

But basically if you did your PhD in the university's chemistry department with a chemist as your main supervisor then you are a chemist who specialised in theoretical/physical chemistry. If you did it in the physics department with a physicist supervisor then you're a physicist, who specialises in applications to chemistry (most typically theoretical and computational quantum physics of atoms and molecules).

Physicist is the most malleable profession in the sciences. Many of the best chemists, biologists and biochemists started life as physicists. That includes many Nobel prize winners as well as inventors of breakthrough lifesaving drugs and vaccines. Goes back at least as far as the outstanding physicist Earnest Rutherford, who was said to have looked down on chemists and chemistry --- quote: "All science is either physics or stamp collecting" --- but the poor sod ended up receiving the Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

[janoskiss (Steve H)]

Originally Posted by Octane

Check out Canada's ministry.

For real?? That looks too good to be true.

[julianh72 (Julian)]

Originally Posted by janoskiss

For real?? That looks too good to be true.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/parliamentarians/en/ministries

[Nikolas (Nik)]

Love the last one on the list, he has a perfect twirly moustache lol

[clive milne]

Originally Posted by Hans Tucker

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/04...oes-viral.html

I wonder what Australia would be like if we had political leaders that weren't just bankers or lawyers...maybe a leader that had a science background. Would Australia be any better or worse off?

Irrespective of an individual's academic background, one thing is certain in this world. If that person also has a moral compass, the corrupt narcissists at the top of the food chain wouldn't permit such an individual to achieve any meaningful position of influence. You need little more than a cursory look at the US primaries to erase any doubt. The best the system can offer is the choice between an utterly mendacious career criminal / Wall street glove puppet on the one hand and a malicious buffoon on the other... Though Rupert and his legion of tapeworms have made careers deflecting your awareness away from the truth of it, there must come a time when we acknowledge that something is profoundly wrong with this picture.

You can easily spot the countries which have displayed the temerity to resist the yoke of hegemony. They're the ones that have been either bombed back to the stone-age, suffer crippling sanctions or brought back under heel via coup d'etat - the preferred method. How many failed states have been created (ostensibly) in the name of bringing them freedom and democracy? How's that track record looking?

Politics is simply the chess board of wealth (re)distribution.
War is non-consentual politics (by other means)
The system is rotten to the core, and getting worse.
A science degree isn't going to fix a thing.