Nature has an editorial and a news item on Bush's Intelligent Design creationism flap. The striking thing about both of them is how incredibly optimistic they are, although they also emphasize that while the response by the scientific community has been vigorous, it has to continue to be strong and outspoken. I agree with this idea, too, although I regret to say that it would be personally impossible for me to do the political part (can you guess why?):
Many experts say that scientists should get more involved in local politics—especially on school boards, where the conflicting views of scientists and advocates of intelligent design often play out. "Scientists have to be evangelical about explaining what science is, as well as its limitations," says Krauss.
I've put the complete text of both articles on Pharyngula. They are well worth reading. They cheered me up, at least.
2 Comments
natural cynic · 11 August 2005
In the same issue, on page 845, another potential problem for PT'ers is suggested in the editor's summary of the letter
"Repeated alcohol consumption leads to tolerance, but not in flies with a newly identified mutation. Flies with this hangover mutation also have a shortened life span and are more susceptible to stresses such as heat and insecticides. There is growing recognition that cellular and systemic stress contributes to drug- and addiction-related behaviours in mammals, and these studies suggest that this role may be conserved in evolution."
HP · 12 August 2005
"Can you guess why?"
Because there is a de facto ban on atheists and freethinkers in American politics.