( CNN ) -- Controversy continues to swirl around the comments made by Todd Akin , Missouri Representative and Senate candidate , that `` legitimate rape '' would only rarely lead to pregnancy . Initially , the media focused on the fallout of his remarks concerning issues of abortion , sexual violence and the effect on women voters . While Akin has vigorously recanted his remarks , and both Mitt Romney and President Obama have lambasted his statements , only more recently has attention been paid to the fact that Akin sits on the House Committee for Science , Space and Technology . The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee 's petition for Speaker of the House John Boehner to remove Akin , a Republican , from the House science committee is just starting to gain momentum , and well it should . The House science committee has oversight on congressional science and technology policy and thereby helps shape the course of billions of dollars of related funding . In other words , Akin -- who is now best known for his folkloric views on reproduction -- has a strong say in determining the long-term scientific progress of our country . News : Akin imbroglio is bad news for Republicans . How can a science and technology leader like the United States allow itself to be governed by people who try to ignore scientific fact ? Given Akin 's `` magical '' theories regarding rape , abortion and pregnancy , I would not want him having a say in the long-term plans of a single middle-school science class , much less our nation as a whole . How do we let him get away with this ? And make no mistake : We are likely to let him get away with this . Akin 's apologize-and-move-on method is quite effective in politics today . In politics , the woeful reality is that folklore often trumps real science . Opinion : Rape can make you pregnant . Period . The situation with Akin is not an isolated one . The dynamics of politics over science ( and emotions over data ) are widespread in our government today . For much of the past year , political forces in Congress have pushed to `` overturn science '' by seeking to overturn the EPA Endangerment finding . In that case , the EPA had used what it deemed to be the best-available scientific data to conclude that greenhouse gases were a pollutant and a danger to public health , and in response ( following standing government policies ) it issued an emissions rule for cars and some trucks , only to encounter political hurdles questioning the data . If you want to have an argument over how government policy should or should n't be applied to climate change issues , that is fair . If you want to fund further data collection ( by reputable entities ) to add to our understanding of climate phenomena , that too is reasonable . What is not reasonable is to discredit years of scientific data without any scientific basis for doing so and to ask for a do-over . Such data takes years to collect after all , and should not be used as a stalling tactic . News : 'Legitimate rape ' reaction goes global . The recurring theme in these stories is that when data goes against a politician 's belief or hope , they try to refute the data and the science -- sometimes supplying their own folklore as stand-ins for real data -- rather than taking on the higher-level and more complex policy issues regarding how to respond to the data . Further examples are also easy to find , including Michele Bachmann 's pseudo-scientific statement regarding vaccine side effects . As experimental scientists , my colleagues and I are often faced with situations where we hoped our experiments would yield data that neatly agree with our hypothesis , but when we actually run the experiment , we see the data indicates something either subtly or dramatically different . What do we do ? Rerunning the experiment is , of course , a natural step . But eventually , if substantial data points to a hypothesis different than ours , we need to adjust our thinking , adjust our hypotheses , and accept what the data is showing us . News : Akin takes on 'party bosses , ' insists he 'can win this race ' Where does this leave us regarding Akin and the House science committee ? One of my key roles as a thesis research adviser is to help guide undergraduate and graduate students to accept the realities of experimental science , and to think hard about what their gathered data is telling us , rather than to wish for different data . Increasingly , I see that one of my key roles as a U.S. citizen is to guide our politicians along a similar path : Rep. Akin and his cohort can not be allowed to substitute folklore for science , and it is our responsibility to stop them . Most notably , those who choose not to distinguish between folklore and science should not be on the House science committee . The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Margaret Martonosi .
Missouri Rep. Todd Akin sits on the House Committee for Science , Space and Technology . Margaret Anderson : A movement to remove him from the committee is starting to gain momentum . Akin and his colleagues can not be allowed to substitute folklore for science , she said . Martonosi : How can the U.S. allow itself to be governed by those who ignore scientific evidence ?