When it comes to major modern crises—climate change, anti-vaxxers, the proliferation of weaponized technology, to name a few—it becomes clear how science and politics are intimately connected to one another. In our discussion with Siarhei Biareishyk, we looked back to the infamous Lysenko affair as a relevant chapter in history in examining questions at the intersection of science and politics. Trofim Lysenko, a Soviet agronomist and biologist, started this political campaign against Mendelian genetics and science-based agriculture and instead in support for Lamarckism. Lysenkoism tainted Soviet history of science: a scandalous affair that led to imprisonment and the dismissal of thousands of Soviet biologists in its political campaign to suppress the dissident scientific opinions, in addition to famine and declined crop yields in the USSR. The Lysenko affair is a historical lesson of the potentially detrimental consequence when there is aggressive political intervention in scientific research. It seems that the pattern of the Lysenko affair is not at all restricted to a certain political atmosphere like under the dictatorship of Stalin. Reflecting on climate change, I hear echoes of the Lysenko affair: how the values of politics meddle in and impede scientific work. To escape this dangerous pattern, I propose that science and politics should be kept in check in some ethical boundaries to preserve their intrinsic values, paving a new way for their cooperation.