Whenever I write about politics, religion, or something that is not 100% straight-up science, I get a handful of protests in the comments, usually along the lines of "I came here because this is supposed to be an astronomy blog…"^*.

Well, for the n^th time, I’ll let y’all know: this is primarily a science blog, but not exclusively so. I think people like what I write about astronomy because I add a dimension of humanity to it, since I’m personally involved with some of it, and I know some of the fun back story. But that same humanity means I’m human, and I have other things on my mind too.

This may sound crass, but it’s true: it’s my blog, and I’ll write what I want to. If you don’t like it, there are lots of other sites about astronomy on the web. Spare me the lectures, the drama, and the grandstanding in the comments. If you don’t want to read my blog, that’s fine. I can’t please everyone, and by its very nature a scientific and skeptical blog will make some people upset. But I am not going to change my style, my topics, or my behavior (unless there is some evidence-based reason, of course). So if you’re gonna go, just go. Being dramatic about it in the comments won’t change anything.

But before you leave, take a good look at whatever it was that I wrote that ticked you off. Why? Because in a recent post, I was accused of bashing Christians, bashing religion, saying that all global warming deniers are also young-Earth creationists, and I’m sure if I look more carefully there’s something in the comments about me eating kittens, too. I never said any of that. People are reading their own issues into what I wrote, and and not reading what I actually wrote.

How ironic is that?

So here is my stance, for those of you who still don’t get it: I am a scientist, a skeptic, a science fiction fan, a father, a pet owner, and a human being. I have opinions, and I have a blog, and therefore I will write about my opinions. I try very hard to base my opinions on well-grounded, evidence-based reasoning, and I try very hard not to extrapolate beyond what is reasonable.

But I will not tolerate the attacks on science, whether they come from politicians, religious zealots, New Age gurus, or regular old folks. And I will speak out.

Update: Coincidentally, PZ Myers at Pharyngula just wrote a similar post (his is about religion), as did Chris Pirillo (about politics). Make of this what you will.

^* And why don’t these same people complain when I post about cartoons I like, or some funny website I found? After all, those are "off-topic" too. Could it be that I simply don’t have the same political or religious affiliation that they do, and they don’t like it? I know some people just don’t want to hear more about those topics, but still, I don’t think that applies to most of the folks who leave in a huff. I strongly suspect that many (but not all) of those who do leave in a flash of drama need to very carefully examine their own beliefs; they are guilty of precisely the crimes they accuse me of.

So now we have an ex-Surgeon General saying the Bush White House pressured him not to talk about stem cell research and other topics not deemed palatable by this troglodyte Administration that is so routinely antiscience that if they said the Sun rises in the West we’d have a hundred slavering "journalists" saying they have been saying that for years, and hardly anyone would notice.

Here’s what the former SG had to say about Bush’s White House:

“Anything that doesn’t fit into the political appointees’ ideological, theological or political agenda is ignored, marginalized or simply buried,” Dr. Richard Carmona, who served as the nation’s top doctor from 2002 until 2006, told a House of Representatives committee.

Shocker.

I’m glad he spoke up. But hey, maybe this would have helped a bit more five years ago. He was the frackin’ Surgeon General, the top doctor in this country and in charge of this nation’s health! a spokesman for health in this country!

What makes this worse is that I remember quite well a Surgeon General who spoke her mind, and to heck with the repercussions. Can you imagine any person in this current Administration, let alone the Surgeon General, saying "Condoms will break, but I can assure you that vows of abstinence will break more easily than condoms"?

And why, oh why do we hear about these things long after it’s too late, when lives have been lost, when procedures and laws have been ossified, and we condemn an entire generation to a future that they can’t afford?

I’m looking at you, Colin Powell.

Here’s some advice: speak up. Now. I’ve already contacted my Senators and Rep several times since I’ve moved to Colorado, and I’m not planning on stopping. I’ve got things to say, and I’m going to say them.

Hat tip to Angela Gunn.

So I’m coming home from a quick trip to the store, and I’m scanning the radio stations. I hear NASA Administrator Mike Griffin’s voice, so I stop. He’s talking about global warming on NPR.

At first he says some adequate stuff. When the interviewer asks him about what NASA should do about global warming, Griffin responds that NASA is not charged with doing anything about warming, which is true, but weak. I would have been happier had he said, however, that this is a serious issue and NASA’s charge is to examine it scientifically with every tool they can bring to bear.

But then he said something that really shocked me. I’m glad I was already pulled over at my house when I heard it, because had I been driving I would have veered off the road.

I have no doubt that … a trend of global warming exists. I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with. To assume that it is a problem is to assume that the state of Earth’s climate today is the optimal climate, the best climate that we could have or ever have had and that we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn’t change. First of all, I don’t think it’s within the power of human beings to assure that the climate does not change, as millions of years of history have shown. And second of all, I guess I would ask which human beings — where and when — are to be accorded the privilege of deciding that this particular climate that we have right here today, right now is the best climate for all other human beings. I think that’s a rather arrogant position for people to take.

(my emphasis)

When Griffin was first appointed to be head of NASA, I was excited. Here we have an engineer, and one who had fought against some NASA dumbosity in the past involving the space station. But when he says stuff like this, I wonder what the heck he’s thinking.

We know the Earth is warming. There is no doubt about this. None. You may ask if this warming is a bad thing, and the overwhelming majority of scientists will say yes, it is. But even if we aren’t sure that it’s a bad thing, doesn’t it make sense to not take any frakking chances? This is our planet we’re talking about!

Right now, our agriculture and many other forms of human sustainability are based on this climate. If it changes, so will our methods of survival. The U.S. is still a major food source for the planet, and if our climate changes, then that status may change as well. If temperatures go up a few degrees, will Kansas still produce wheat? Will Iowa and Nebraska still give us corn? Will California and Florida still be able to raise fruit crops? And this does not take into account other countries and their own major crops, like coffee beans, bananas, sugar cane, and so on.

It’s not arrogant at all to assume that this climate that we have now is a good one for our needs. I’m sure it could be better in some places, of course, but letting global warming continue is certainly not the best way to see if the climate can improve for some people. Mr. Griffin seems to be implying that we should throw the dice and see what happens. He is definitely saying that we cannot say for sure if we should do anything or not. That’s utter nonsense. That’s like saying that I am healthy, but maybe sticking a knife randomly in my body and twisting it around might improve something somewhere.

I am still reeling that the head of NASA — which, at its heart, is a scientific agency — would say something so ridiculous.

But maybe he does have a point. After all, some places may benefit from warming. I’m sure the citizens of Antarctica will be thrilled.

Update (Friday at 4:00 MT): According to ThinkProgress, White House Science Advisor Jack Marburger said:

"It’s pretty obvious that the NASA administrator was speaking about his own personal views and by no means representing or attempting to represent the administration’s views or broader policy," Marburger said. "He’s got a very wry sense of humor and is very outspoken."

That, again IMO, is unadulterated crap. When you are the head of a government agency, you have no personal opinion. Like it or not, when you are in a quotable position, everything you say is said as the head of that agency. And if Marburger is trying to play this off as a joke, that is contemptible.

Note: after writing this, I see that James Hansen, NASA’s top climate scientist, agrees with me.

And I mean all of you!

As you may know the creationist liar Ken Ham is opening a mortuary of science museum of creation in Kentucky. Needless to say, this museum will have all sorts of lies, twisted reason (twisted into a Klein bottle), and misrepresentation of reality.

A peaceful protest is planned, as I wrote about recently. But we need more than that. Eugenie Scott, who is the head of the National Center for Science Education, has organized a Statement of Concern, and it needs signatures. They’re looking for scientists, and specifically physical scientists, to sign the statement.

Are you a postdoc or faculty-level astronomer, chemist, physicist, engineer, or geologist in Ohio, Indiana, or Kentucky? Do you care that science is being horribly abused by the likes of Ham? Then sign the Statement!

Update 2: an article in the news said a fund has been set up for Ms. Malloy by Wells Fargo bank. As I write this it’s evening and they are closed, but I’ll check tomorrow to see if there is a way to donate to this fund online. I didn’t see anything at their website.

Update (Monday, May 14): This blog entry has incited quite a reaction. I expected some, given that I am poking at what is essentially a religious viewpoint about miracles, and a superstitious viewpoint on luck. However, somewhere along the line while writing it I lost track of my ultimate goal which was to simply point out how we tend to ascribe causes to random events, and how this leads to uncritical thinking. Where I blew it was jumping right into this discussion before acknowledging where it comes from: a real human who has suffered a horrible accident. I know it’s hard to tell tone from words, but I am being very honest when I say I wish nothing but good for Ms. Malloy on her road to recovery, and I apologize for any grief she’s had about this. While I disagree with many (if not most) of the negative comments about the meat of my claim, what I cannot disagree with is that the tone of this entry is more snarky than it should have been. I let my irritation get the better of me stylistically, and again I apologize. I hope that my extended comment on this entry clears that up. Given the number of comments and the back-and-forth of them, I will leave this entry intact as I wrote it (except for the insertion about the chiropractor); but it can also serve as a reminder to any of us who blog, comment, or just plain discuss topics, that many times there is a reality behind the discussion, and people who are affected. Some of the comments below cross well over the line as well, so I hope that everyone involved here has learned a lesson.

Man, I get tired of this kind of stuff:

A car crash in Nebraska on Jan. 25 threw Malloy up against the vehicle’s dashboard. In the process, her skull became separated from her spine. The clinical term for her condition is called internal decapitation.

That’s the gist of the article: a woman survives a bad injury that in most cases would kill the victim. But the amount of bad thinking that continues from there is astonishing. Let’s look:

Miracles do happen. That’s what doctors said about 30-year-old Shannon Malloy.

Ah yes, a miracle. It has nothing to do with pure statistics and probability. Or the fact that medical science has advanced enough to save someone’s life.

Dr. Gary Ghiselli, a chiropractor an orthopedic spine surgeon at the Denver Spine Center, said Malloy’s will to survive is what saved her.

A chiropractor said it was her will. Right. I suppose someone involved with what is at the very best a borderline quack field would say it was her will, and not, say, probability and medical science. Note added Monday, May 14: The original news article said that Dr. Ghiselli was a chiropractor, but that has been amended in that article to indicate that Dr. Ghiselli is an orthopedic spine surgeon — a profession that I can say with some confidence and personal experience is a lot more trustworthy, reliable, and scientific than chiropractic.

“I had a fractured skull, swollen brain stem, bleeding in my brain, GI tube in my stomach, can’t swallow, and nerve damage in my eyes (because they cross),” said Malloy.

Doctors are working on that but she has been lucky enough to get the halo removed.

I know I shouldn’t get upset when people talk about luck, but it still irks me. Luck is probability taken personally, as the saying goes. She wasn’t lucky to get the halo removed, it’s just the way things worked out. I have actually specially worked on not using the word "luck" anymore. It’s just another accepted notion that’s incorrect, and I don’t want to promote it, even colloquially.

“Oh my God, it’s a miracle,” said Malloy.

I guess then it was also a miracle that God made the terrible, horrifying accident to happen in the first place, too. You can’t pick and choose which random events to ascribe to God, folks. If He throws the dice for one, He throws the dice for all.

“It’s a miracle that she was able to survive from the actual accident. It’s a miracle that she’s made the progress that she’s made,” said Ghiselli [the chiropractor].

See above. I suppose then it’s a miracle her skull was severed from her spine, she sustained nerve damage, and she cannot see well or swallow properly.

That’s some miracle. Tell you what: I’ll take my chances on probability.

In England, there is a long, long tradition of public outreach in astronomy. The leader of this is beyond a doubt Sir Patrick Moore, a man who is the UK version of Carl Sagan. His show, "The Sky at Night", has been running for decades, and he has made the skies accessible to everyone.

So I am very disappointed by comments he made today:

British TV standards are deteriorating because the BBC is “run by women”, astronomer Sir Patrick Moore has said.

[...]

The presenter said: “The trouble is the BBC now is run by women and it shows soap operas, cooking, quizzes, kitchen-sink plays. You wouldn’t have had that in the golden days.”

[...]

“I used to watch Doctor Who and Star Trek, but they went PC – making women commanders, that kind of thing. I stopped watching.”

This kind of misogynism is truly shocking to read, especially from such a distinguished and respected gentleman. I won’t even bother debunking this kind of trash; if it isn’t self-evident to you, then I won’t waste my breath.

A couple of years ago I was invited to go on the show as a guest of Sir Patrick’s — he is a Moon hoax debunker as well — but we couldn’t work out the details. Now I won’t go on even if they ask me again. It’s a shame, really, but since he’s made his views public, I don’t see much of a need to endorse him, tacitly or otherwise.

Tip o’ the monocle to Teek — who is a strong woman and worthy of my respect.

Why do I fight bad thinking?

Because of things like this:

HYDERABAD, India (Reuters) – An elderly husband and wife were burnt to death in Andhra Pradesh after villagers accused them of practising black magic, tied them together on a pyre and set them on fire, police said on Thursday.

“The aged couple died screaming for help,” said police superintendent P.V. Sunil Kumar.

In many cases, it’s pretty easy to connect uncritical thinking to murdering innocent people.

Ironically, the article goes on:

Belief in black magic is common in some parts of rural India, despite the country’s robust economic growth and cutting-edge high-technology industries.

Why is that ironic? Because I know a lot of Americans will read that and think, "stupid bumpkins" or some such derogatory term, and they forget that just a few nights ago, three out of ten people on stage vying to become President of these United States raised their hands to affirm that they, too, have no qualms dumping centuries of scientific reasoning to embrace fantasy. And the consequences are just as grave.

We are all savage animals, and thinking clearly is hard, very hard. But not thinking clearly comes with a very dear price. Let’s hope soon that everyone gets tired of paying it.