The Intersection

"We've gotten lots of e-mails calling our attention to previously published reports, some of which had gotten precious little attention at the time, but also we also received a couple of entirely new reports of the suppression of scientific research by the Bush Administration." -- Rep Miller, talking about the "Post-James Hansen-censorship world".

Despite implication to the contrary (eg, on some other blogs), the vast majority of scientists are a reserved lot, preferring to do their science in quiet anonymity.

But like the sleeping giant, scientists are best left undisturbed.

It looks to me like the giant just woke up.

All I can say is "Woe to those within the Bush administration who have been tickling his foot with the feather of 'Censorus maximus' (The Censor bird)"

Posted by: laurence jewett | April 14, 2006 11:12 AM

laurence, I don't agree with you description of scientitst. Most scientists I have seen are not reserved, and don't prefer to do their science in quiet anonymity. However, they prefer to not get involved in politics, and having to dumb down their results for the general public, just to see their results used in ways they were never ment to be used.

Posted by: Kristjan Wager | April 15, 2006 5:54 AM

>>laurence, I don't agree with you description of scientitst. Most scientists I have seen are not reserved,

Allow me to clarify: When I say "reserved", I mean "reserved with respect to claims about their research." In other words, they make an attempt (more than the average person, at any rate) NOT to exaggerate the results of that research and, by and large, do NOT attempt to hype their results in the popular press.

Those who DO hype their research are not REAL scientists, in my book. (Convenient, eh?)

>> and don't prefer to do their science in quiet anonymity.

When I refer to "anonymity, I am NOT referring to "anonymity within the scientific realm". It should really go without saying that, with few exceptions, most scientists want their colleagues to know what they are doing "in the scientific arena". Otherwise, that would sort of defeat the purpose.

I am referring to "public anonymity". While there may be a few scientists who like to be the center of media attention, most do not, for the simple reason that having to deal with the media takes away time from what they enjoy most: doing science.

Note: I am talking here about the natural scientists I have known, NOT political "scientists".

Posted by: laurence jewett | April 30, 2006 3:48 PM