How much longer are we going to stand for ID/creation nonsense to challenge evolution in public schools?

What standards of evaluation separate science from other ways of knowing, such as the humanities, social sciences, or religion? How do you rank these different ways of knowing when making policy decisions?

The US Senate has not yet ratified this Treaty despite support from President Bush and President Obama. The accession of territory, both in the Pacific and in the Arctic Oceans, will result in substantial new opportunities for science and business, and is supported by the Pentagon and industry interests. The Global Security Institute has published a paper, in 2004, that links opposition to claims of UN meddling in United States' affairs.

The American Science Pledge asks candidates for elected office to commit to basing public policy decisions on the knowledge produced by science, which may be informed but not superseded by economic interests and their values. Will you sign the American Science Pledge?

One candidate denies the reality of global warming, the other agrees it's important but not top priority. I want them to specify what would have to happen or what would they have to find out that would make them realize it is top priority. If no amount of evidence would do it, then they need to admit this, because that would mean that they place short term political gain over even the most enormous tragedy.

The increase in religious ideas in the 50's gave rise to the placement of this phrase on US currency, but some argue it is a violation of the principles of the founding of this country as a strictly secular nation that takes no sides with regard to "Gods".

Candidates for office are often accused of misconstruing the validity of scientific issues, such as the credibility of climate change research, in order to gain popularity with certain sections of the electorate. Should there be consequences for a public figure who delibrately spreads misinformation about established scientific issues?

When regulations are written should information gathered and reviewed by neutral scientists trump data provided by industries about to be regulated?

All politicians must balance economic considerations against scientific realities. Politics are by necessity short term, while the scientific consequences may seem very removed from the day to day pressure of politics. How can government, as contrasted with politics, ensure the long-term good of the nation?

Even President Obama, who says he supports science and R&D, has requested a flat NIH budget for the coming year. What policies do you envision to help spur R&D without any additional funding being provided from the federal government? In your response, please consider the fact that the private industry has never been one to supply much support for basic science and/or applied research without a justifiable profit margin on the horizon and to essentially rely on an increase in effort from that sector is not a viable option for keeping the U.S. competitive in a global economy.

Please explain the importance of the Scientific Method and how it advances science.

This question tests the candidates understanding of human biology and reproduction.

There is a major push in the K-12 community to promote STEM careers. Many young men and women are preparing for a future in STEM careers. The nation must ensure there will be employment opportunities for our future generation that commits to STEM Careers in the still unpredictable economic environment.

In the US, GMOs are now routinely used in agriculture and distributed to consumers (or fed to cattle used for meat consumption, e.g.) in a non-transparent way, whereas their use has been banned in some European countries, out of the precautionary principle, since their envionmental and long term effects on people's health are not well known.

Only three countries are still in the dark ages of measurements and still do not use the simple metric system. They are the LIberia, Myanmar, and the USA. What is being done to change this?