Earth Day

I heard an interesting story on NPR about Earth Day. When it first started in the 1970's (1974?) there were protests, gatherings, and rallies across the country in support of conservation and preservation. Government responded to the will of the people and enacted many of the same environmental reforms we work with and are limited to today. (Endangered Species Act, Clean Air Act) These 40 or so years later it seems like the recession turned the table- elements of government want to enact legislation to save the environment from climate change and pollution, but the will of the people has been dampened.
Why is there no popular movement to save the environment? Compassion fatigue? Disinterest? It's not like in the 60's and 70's people were individually more relevant and powerful in relation to their governments, it just seems like this generation (or the last few) have lost the dream and will to believe not only in progress and the impact of the individual, but in our right to dream and take that dream to government.
For me, Earth Day is a sad reminder of activism which has gone from being necessary and vital to unnecessary in the eyes of those who have the biggest difference to make.

What Motivates Me to Learn Chemistry

I am motivated to learn chemistry based on my yearning to end my study of the laboratory sciences by the time I am at a prestigious university (which would like me to know science). I am, in addition, interested in learning the fundamentals of chemistry as they might be applicable to other sciences- psychology, sociology, philosophy (ontology/epistemology, for ology's sake), that I will be more intrinsically interested in studying later. I do not, sadly but not regretfully, find the mechanics and casualties of chemistry to be fascinating, interesting, or often comprehensible or easily applicable for me, although, conceptually, I find other aspects intriguing.
Chemistry is probably not a subject I would take if I was given a totally open choice on what courses I could enroll in. However, it's necessary for the school's and college's curriculum, as well as my other potential future plans, and, as such, I strive to succeed in it, with mixed results.

Science and Politics

Science and politics are sometimes related in surprising ways. Other times, not so much. I will touch on two such topics today.
The first is the surprising. Science influences the effectiveness of politicians and politics in persuading people to elect them or go along with initiatives. The powers of persuasion are all very scientific. What people do and don't enjoy hearing, how they react, and whether they can be motivated to vote or act is all dependent on neurology. Some politicians study and adapt to these realities, while other simply harness it naturally.
The second, not so much. Stem cell research has been a major controversial issue in politics since research began, because conservatives are concerned it could lead to a type of cloning, and that it generally destroys the sanctity of life. However, innovations gleaned from stem cell research can in fact be used to help heal formerly terminal and irreparable diseases, potentially cancers, by regenerating healthy tissue. With a democrat in the White House, it seems that stem cell research will get another, controversial, chance.