If you’ve been reading my blog for more than about three seconds, you’ll know that I am pretty vocal about the issue of science being under attack by political and religious extremists (just go to the "Categories" link on my sidebar and click on "Antiscience"… clicking on "Rants" will net you a few entries as well).
There are many groups whose voices are starting to be heard about this as well. One group that has just started up is called Defend Science. Their goal is, in their own words,
to rally broad opposition and resistance to the mounting attacks on science and scientific thinking which are unfolding in the United States.
I’m for that! In fact, I really am. They are having a rally tonight (Thursday) on the Berkeley campus at 7:00 p.m. I was invited to go, and I was really looking forward to it, but I have come down with a bad sore throat and cannot go. However, I implore you, if you’re in the area, to go. The speakers tonight include many scientists, who, like me, are fed up with this blatant, egregious, and frankly appalling attack on reality.
The group also has an online petition. Here is one part of it:
IN THE UNITED STATES TODAY SCIENCE, AS SCIENCE, IS UNDER ATTACK AS NEVER BEFORE.
The signs of this are everywhere. The attacks are coming at an accelerating pace, and include frequent interventions by powerful forces, in and out of the Bush Administration, who seem all too willing to deny scientific truths, disrupt scientific investigations, block scientific progress, undermine scientific education, and sacrifice the very integrity of the scientific process itself — all in the pursuit of implementing their particular political agenda. And today this dominant political agenda is profoundly allied and intertwined with an extremist (and extremely anti-science) ideological agenda put forward by powerful fundamentalist religious forces commonly known as the Religious Right. These fundamentalists now have extensive influence and representatives in major institutions of the U.S. government, including Congress and the White House. This itself goes a long way towards explaining why science itself is under such unprecedented attack.
It is commonplace under the current Administration for the government to deny funding, censor scientific reports, or in other ways undermine scientific research which might turn up facts which they don’t want to hear; to manipulate, distort, or outright suppress scientific findings they find objectionable; to attempt to reshape government scientific panels to obtain policy recommendations on issues ranging from health to the environment, based less on actual scientific findings than on the requirements of the Administration’s agenda.
On their list are a few astronomers I know, including Gibor Basri, Andrew Hamilton, and (planet-finder) Geoff Marcy. I added my name there today as well.
This is not some ivory-tower issue (which in itself would be bad enough). When people are denied medicine because of the narrow-minded beliefs of someone else, when we live on a planet on the brink (over the brink) of an environmental disaster of a scale not seen since the Pleistocene, when obvious and evidence-based reality is squashed, mangled, and tortured by a few people who happen to be in charge (and many if not most times have the media as willing accomplices), then this affects all of us, every single one of us.
I will not sit idly by and watch this happen. Groups like Defend Science won’t either. Support them.
April 13th, 2006 at 11:18 am
I’d love to go but I’ll be busy at an ID rally on the other side of the country.
Now truthfully I wish them the best and I will try and give what support I can.
April 13th, 2006 at 11:22 am
This is great news! Hell yes I signed the petition! I’m not close to Berkeley, unfortunately, so I can’t attend either. But I’m ecstatic to see people really starting to speak out about this.
April 13th, 2006 at 11:24 am
Good luck! As a conservative, and a Christian, I find the narrow-mindedness of anyone in the fringes of religion or political thought frightening. I love science, I read the site regularly and I love when you blast the “conspiracy theorists” with fact. Yes, some parts of science are based on theory and I do believe that this universe wasn’t created by randomness. However, that doesn’t excuse the fact that the fringe people (both left and right) won’t bother listening to reason. Won’t look at all sides of an issue. I’m glad there are more level headed people like Phil in this world than people like Pat Robertson or Michael Moore. It would be a scary place if the fringe took over. Yikes!
Hey Phil, you also converted a friend of mine who was so adamant that the Moon Landings didn’t happen. I showed him the site, and bam, problem solved. Thank God. Now if I can just get him to bother to not take that awful “Loose Change” conspiracy hack video out there at face value. Rock on you Mad Scientist!
April 13th, 2006 at 11:28 am
I’d be interested in what they think about the wall street journal piece about scientists being harrased cause they didn’t toe the line on global warming. (and note, harrased regardless of the science, even if it was incorrect)
Actually I’d like to know what they thought about Comedy Central censoring images of Mohammed from airing on South Park… not even a ‘cartoon’ can go unharrased by the crazed mystics…
But I guess Comedy Central thinks that even the wiff of potential violence trumps free speech.
Sorry BA, color me skeptical… but it just seems all too much like an excuse to go politically off the deep end. I wish them luck on achieving their stated larger goals, I’m just cynical and suspicious, I guess.
April 13th, 2006 at 11:32 am
I linked to them from my LJ. Hopefully some of the LJ people I know will sign or spread the word. Keep up the excellent work!
April 13th, 2006 at 11:37 am
The signatory list would have a lot more impact if a few less of the signors were scientists and a few more came from other walks of life — lawyers, urban planners, concerned parents, union members, New Orleans evacuees, farmers and ranchers; people who don’t so obviously have a vested interest in science being well-supported and well-funded. The point of any pro-science political movement needs to be that everyone has a vested interest in public policy being founded on good science, not just scientists — the word needs to be got out to a broader audience.
April 13th, 2006 at 12:01 pm
[b]Emily[/b], that’s a good point. I’ll talk to the organizers and see if we can get more non-scientists in the fold.
April 13th, 2006 at 12:53 pm
Although I appreciate, agree with and totally support what they want to do, an online petition is about as useful as flatulence in a wind tunnel.
Because any monkey with a browser can get to them, they’re almost always polluted by monkeys (concrete proof of evolution if you ask me), and as a result, they are taken much less seriously than regular, paper petitions… and let’s face it, paper petitions aren’t taken very seriously to begin with.
April 13th, 2006 at 1:09 pm
Comedy Central did that as a joke. It was part of the episode, not because they were “scared.”
And I’ve signed the petition, and have forwarded it to others I know.
April 13th, 2006 at 2:23 pm
signed and contributed - thanks Phil, hope you get better soon
April 13th, 2006 at 2:37 pm
Emily says:
Reading the page leads me to believe they intend scientists sign and non-scientists to not sign. I agree, the congresscritters will be more likely to pay attention to Jane and Joe Voter than Dr. Science. I made a small donation. I’ll check back to see if they change to wording to include those of us college degree challenged. I will add links to my web page (not that many visit … )
jbs
April 13th, 2006 at 3:18 pm
Followup to my previous note: I emailed Defend Science and got a quick reply with this:
So I added my name to the petition.
jbs
April 13th, 2006 at 3:32 pm
After reading John B. Sandlin’s last message, I decided to sign too.
April 13th, 2006 at 3:37 pm
I’m just old enough to remember when Sputnik was launched. In the aftermath there was a big, no huge push to teach more science, math, engineering, etc. in schools. At the time it was perceived, whether real or not that the U.S. had lost its lead in those fields. Back then learning about science and doing actual science was considered, dare I say it patriotic. Unfortunately that is no longer the case. It’s so much easier to just sit back and praise Jesus to come on down than it is to grasp often counterintuitive scientific concepts.
I suppose it’s because my formative years were spent during those scientific go go years of the sixties that I can’t help feeling that for the anti-science crowd to be willing to see the U.S fall behind the rest of the world they must really hate this country.
How’s this for a bumper sticker “Defend Science, it’s the patriotic thing to do.â€
April 13th, 2006 at 3:50 pm
“Defend Science, it’s the patriotic thing to do”.
Sounds like an oxymoron. Science is universal.
April 13th, 2006 at 3:54 pm
I’m not worried about Berkeley. These guys need to have rallies in Topeka. Lawyers would be good, too.
April 13th, 2006 at 6:19 pm
“Reading the page leads me to believe they intend scientists sign and non-scientists to not sign.”
I got the same impression which is why I did not sign. I’d love to if they wanted “regular” folks to sign as well!
Donna
April 13th, 2006 at 10:53 pm
I signed it with the following comment: We could fund health care for everyone in the US if we used science to weed out the worthless remedies we now spend billions on.
April 14th, 2006 at 1:43 am
’nuff said. And, because science is universal, I might go and add my name, even though I’m not a US citizen.
BTW, Berkely is a long way for me - around 7000 or 8000 miles, I think.
April 14th, 2006 at 5:51 am
I added my name and a comment to reword the petition to incled the regular folks.
Under Title I put “US Citizen and Voter”
April 14th, 2006 at 6:15 am
Does Defend Science have a big budget? If not, they should do some active fundraising (I’m sure there are plenty of possible benefactors out there). The reason I point this out is that they can then go on the offensive like the Discovery Institute, hire professional PR people to get the message across, etc. This thing will only work when the mainstream media become interested.
April 14th, 2006 at 7:08 am
I have also added my name to the petition, though I’m in Australia. I feel it is a global thing, and we have to be aware of the insidious nature these crackpot proponents of anti-science go about undermining ordinary people’s beliefs by only proclaiming their rigid, cockeyed and totally erroneous view of the world, and on the othe hand, dismissing anything that is at variance with their narrow beliefs.
My slight criticism is that the ‘Petition” is rather long, convoluted and limited to only a certain section of the society, but that has been mentioned by others too. And it is not just an ‘American’ battle, there are others across the world that need to express their thoughts, in support, as the ramifications are global in the long run. Thanks again Phil for that opportunity to do just that, by bringing it to our attention.
Ivan.
April 14th, 2006 at 7:24 am
[…] Phil Plait points us to Defend Science, a group that is holding protests and circulating a petition decrying attacks on objective scientific thinking within the U.S. I personally wasn’t that fond of the way the petition itself was written — a little too overheated, with a lot of capital letters — but it’s absolutely a worthy cause, and I am happy to go along. […]
April 14th, 2006 at 7:49 am
[…] (With hat tip to Phil Plait at Bad Astronomy) […]
April 14th, 2006 at 8:19 am
Thanks BA for letting us know.
I have signed up, too.
“Mankind’s advancements, due largely to the rigors inherent to the scientific method, are undeniable. These continual blessings should not be undermined or usurped by any opponent that would act to impede the ability of science to discover, and teach, the truths of natural processes.”
April 14th, 2006 at 12:30 pm
I’m a little disappointed in the BA. While I am wholly pro-science, I am vehemently opposed to propaganda and alarmism which most of the so-called human induced global warming theory is centered around. Reliable meteorological/climatological data have been kept for less than 200 years. Not only that, the less-than-a-degree-Centigrade change in global temps in the last 100 years to me does not strike as conclusive evidence that we are culpable for any so-called damage to the planet. It simply deomnstrates the dynamic nature of the Earth, its oceans and its relationship with the sun.
Unfortunately, the entire “anti-science” crowd is nothing more than “global warming” hysteria in disguise. Global warming hysteria is nothing more than anti-capatilism in disguise.
I wish the “defend science” groups would find other topics to discuss - there are still people who deny the age of the earth- rather than cramming ‘Day After Tomorrow’ alarmism down our throats.
In addition to being pro-science, these groups should be equally in favor of hearing both sides as there are numerous arguments AGAINST human induced climate change.
Sorry to rant. I still love the BA.
April 14th, 2006 at 1:25 pm
Spank, I disagree with your conclusions, and your evidence. I suggest you read the blog/website http://www.realclimate.org/ which has the actual skinny on the reality of global warming.
April 14th, 2006 at 1:33 pm
@Kevin,
No, it wasn’t part of the joke. Comedy Central censored the image. Not the South Park guys. That is my current understanding.
April 15th, 2006 at 7:10 am
I’ve signed it, and I’m not a scientist. I’m not even American - I’m English, but I am starting to see the same muddle-headed thinking starting to catch on over here too. It’s not confined to the U.S. any more. As I stated in the notes, we need to take a leaf from Roger Bacon’s notes - he was fighting this same fight over 700 years ago. If we’re not careful we’ll end up in a new Dark ages dominated by religious superstition, just as it was in his time. He must be spinning in his grave.
April 15th, 2006 at 7:21 pm
Same here, Elwood. As a journalist, I’m supposed to be neutral, but nobody with half a brain can be “neutral” when the forces of reason and intelligent inquiry are being attacked by superstition, greed, and ignorance. Pandering to these people is not “neutral,” it is de facto helping them undermine civilization.
While I believe our society HAS some key problems it must address re: how we relate to the world and other life, the ideology of the Dark Ages won’t help us solve those problems. Only more knowledge can do that.
April 16th, 2006 at 2:17 pm
I was just there at the Defend Science site and they foolishly asked for comments at the bottom so I created the following statement for them. Mind you, they wouldn’t accept hard Returns in the text box, so I had to use ¶ marks, but I think they’ll get the idea:
There are many things that are certain besides mere “death & taxes”. There is a fixed value for the electronvolt (1 eV = 1.60217646 × 10^-19 joules), without which the Universe wouldn’t exist, since it could not give rise to us to allow us to interpret it; without something to interpret it, said thing may as well not exist because interpretation requires intelligence, much like the old analogy about “Is there a sound from a falling tree in a forest if no one is there to hear it?”
It was the wildest stroke of luck that conditions came into being to allow us to exist. Or was it?
If our Universe, for all its immense size, is but a pinprick in an unfathomably large tapesty of Universes side by side, then there is a certain inevitably that eventually we would come into existence in one of all those Universes.
It requires no gods or infinite beings or Intelligent Design; only that times passes. There could have been a googleplex (10^10^100) of iterations of Universes before, and more to follow, but in THIS Universe conditions were adequate for us to exist. And if Intelligence does in fact arise, it is duty bound to study the Universe and try to comprehend how it works, without recourse to shepherder’s tales passed from parent to child around the campfire in the hills as they watch their flocks by night.
Once you have a solid methodology, where results can be perfectly duplicated by anyone, at any time, with equivalent equipment and conditions, then you dispense with the superstition, and trudge stolidly towards new frontiers and discoveries. You SHARE your discoveries; others share their insights about your discoveries; together humanity advances.
If we let these antedeluvian prophets steer our course, humanity may as well lay down all its wonders and march straight off into the sea and drown themselves. These people will drag us, kicking and screaming, back into the Dark Ages, where we kill animals for fat to burn in our lamps; where we scratch and claw at the ground to grow inadequate crops and feed malnourished offspring; where we will pray on bended knee for some sort of divine intervention that will never come.
Don’t let these purveyors of myth destroy all that Humanity has accomplished; don’t let vapid, insipid theists vilify “Science”. The most aggravating thing about these people is that they are hypocrites, using all this technology and ability that Science has given us in an attempt to batter down the very doors OF Science!
DEFEND SCIENCE! DEFEND HUMANITY! Save us from those that would turn us into quivering cowardly creatures relying on invisible super-beings to intercede and protect us from things we are too ignorant to understand (like thunder & lightning). Let us not march backwards through time, but bravely towards the future.
Or as Robert A. Heinlein once put it:
The MEEK shall inherit the Earth; the REST of us are going to the STARS!
April 16th, 2006 at 8:39 pm
Signed. And one of only four real live high school students, it looks like.
April 19th, 2006 at 1:46 pm
BA,
Since I agree to some extent with Spank’s views on global warming, and already try to keep up with realclimate, may I suggest some reading for you?
climateaudit.org provides a thorough and well-reasoned critique of one of the more “iconic” global warming papers (that was co-authored by one of the realclimate originators), as well as raising serious issues with multi-proxy studies in general.
For some perspective on science and politics, please see http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheus/. The author(s) have some very good ideas on the role of science and scientists in politics.
March 16th, 2007 at 8:34 am
[…] of scientific findings for the past few years. Examples of this aren’t terribly hard to dig up. And those are just from my site. Try going to Chris Mooney’s blog, or The Scientific […]
July 15th, 2007 at 1:05 am
I’ve never met someone who is trying to advocate for scientific thinking that has any ability to speak to most people in a way that they will find compelling.
In order to get people to pay attention to you, you have to connect with their personal lives. You have to show them “what’s in it for me.” The best way to do this is to focus on people’s basic physical and emotional needs.
If you can show someone how they will be able to save/have more money, get more satisfying relationships, have more sex, etc, then they will listen to you. That’s why advertising works so well!
Nathan