Strings, Rings, and Other Things

By and large, the folks at NASA are pretty cool. In fact, as described in this NY Times story, NASA's top administrator just issued a statement endorsing "scientific openness" throughout the agency. That's good.

But the article shows that this fundamental aspect of science has been frighteningly threatened by political appointees at NASA. As discussed in detail on science blogs like Cosmic Variance and Bad Astronomy, the "intelligent design" folks sent there by Bush are now taking aim at cosmology. If you've been wondering why there's been so much fuss about attacks on evolution, this is the reason: these people aren't just against biology, they're against science as a whole.

The journalism major in question, George Deutsch, tried to insist that a NASA website on Einstein add the word "theory" to every occurance of "Big Bang". He said that the Big Bang is "not proven fact; it is opinion". And lest you be tempted to give him the benefit of the doubt, here's his explanation:

It is not NASA's place, nor should it be to make a declaration such as this about the existence of the universe that discounts intelligent design by a creator.

But wait, it gets worse:

This is more than a science issue, it is a religious issue. And I would hate to think that young people would only be getting one-half of this debate from NASA.

( A few scientific details... )

Now, I won't claim that this one guy speaks for the entire Bush administration, and he clearly doesn't speak for most religious believers. But the point is, this sort of ignorant anti-science is right at home in the modern Republican party, and is often welcomed and even courted there. More to the point, a substantial fraction of our country honestly doesn't seem to recognize that claims like this are laughably wrong.

So those of us who are scientists (or even those who have some level of scientific training) have two responsibilities. First, we have to do a better job of sharing our work with our neighbors: educating the public is our responsibility, and we must not shirk it. And second, we must confront these attacks by the ignorant with all the force that we can muster. Science is a powerful force for good; we must not tolerate its destruction.

It looks like a letter to the editor that I wrote to the Chicago Tribune has made it past the first round of editorial cuts. It is now on their website, and they say they'll let me know if it ends up in the print edition.

The letter is a response to a recent editorial on "intelligent design" creationism; the editorial wasn't bad, but I felt that it came too close to "teach the controversy" for comfort. (There is no serious scientific controversy about the issues in question, that's the point.) Since the Tribune link will eventually disappear, I'll include the text of my letter here.

---

As a scientist, I applaud the Tribune's call for teachers to "inform students that today's science doesn't have every answer," ("Schools and 'intelligent design'", Aug. 14).

That is the very essence of science.

But we must also teach that science can advance only when we seek those answers. By contrast, intelligent design asserts that many scientific questions are forever unanswerable. That claim is based on faith, not reason, and an overwhelming majority of scientists—religious or not—insist that such arguments have no place in a science class.

So by all means, encourage students to ask deep questions and to seek meaning in nature. But don't ask teachers to present unscientific methods as a valid alternative within science itself.

Steuard Jensen
Chicago

---

Update: Looks like it will run in Monday's print edition! Woo hoo!