What do you propose would be appropriate in the hypothetical scenario in which science conflicts with basic human rights? Say for instance in the extreme example, there are too many people science suggests we need to depopulate. Or maybe such and such person is genetically predisposed to engage in disruptive or criminal activity therefore eugenics or pre-emptive incarceration. Reality may or may not reflect that but it wouldn't be the first time a powerful few used science to impose draconian and/or racist policies for political purposes.

I'm not proposing any specific implementation, I don't have one in mind, I'm only floating the goal. The goal is to get "some science" into the mix as a check and a balance. Not to have science take over or run things.

Just something that most of the time provides a very gentle nudge or advisory role, but in the case of another Trump would kick in a bit more strongly. It was a disaster this time, and even if Biden wins, in 4 more years we could a second Trump-type, then a third, then a fourth. The country will not survive that. We need to do something to fix the root problem, not just wait around until it happens again.

As for being hesitant to mess with what the founding fathers created this is a great commentary on that: https://youtu.be/Ti8cMxzmWoA

No i do understand your point and i would agree that we need to introduce some science into the mix to protect us from our leaders and even ourselves in a sense. But since we're opening this can of worms you cant blame me for taking a critical analysis of the situation. We agree for the most part im just trying to spark a discussion to we can start thinking about some of the caveats of how to make this work in practice. As for the video i havent yet watched it so please excuse me if it already addresses some of what im saying but i appreciate the honest dialogue and i very much intend to take a look shortly. Ill follow up after ive taken a look.

To literally change the government would be a ten year project at least. I'm just raising it create discussion. I just think when Trump leaves office people are going to rapidly forget how bad it was. And another Trump (potentially Trump Jr) is just one election away from winning.

But the idea is to guard against either party going nutso. Parties should be given the chance to steer the ship. But we shouldn't let them take apart the ship, and deny is there is water, something has to be out of bounds. Play is "freedom within constraints" there have to be constraints, reality should be a constraint.

Im not saying we shouldn't put the intentions of our founding fathers into context with the modern world im saying we should still protect individual human rights from government abuse of power. Isnt that what we were discussing? Protecting individuals from government abuse and authoritarian rule?

Great commentary was a Joe Rogan clip? Im not impressed. And your arguing a point i never made.