The thing to remember is that the War on Science is really a lot of little battles. Science says a lot of things that people take offense to, inside or outside the US. For instance:
* Releasing large amounts of carbon dioxide into the
atmosphere has significant, negative consequences.
* Most complementary & alternative medicines are ineffective
in most cases.
* Contraceptions are not abortifacients.
* Tobacco use causes cancer.
* There is no compelling evidence that ESP or any other
psychic powers exist.
* Cuts to government spending during a downturn can weaken
the economy.
* Oswald, acting alone and for his own reasons, killed
Kennedy.
* Evolution explains the diversity of life on Earth,
including humans.
But just because someone takes offense to one or more things science says, most people don't take offense to all things science says. This fragments the War -- there aren't two sides, there are a million -- and lets science as a whole progress even as individual areas and projects face varying amounts of hostilities from individuals, organizations, and corporations.
How does science say that Oswald was acting alone and for his own reasons? I am aware of how it can show he was the only shooter, but have not seen any science showing that no one else was involved in the overall operation.
i thought the same thing, although things like disproving the need for a 'magic bullet' takes the wind out of a lot of conspiracy theories. science may not ever 100% prove oswald was 100% alone, but it makes a lot of the whacko theories a lot less required.
