cmooney | February 15, 2006The Progress Report just picked up on the news that Bush may have met with Michael Crichton on global warming, but with that exception, this story doesn't seem to be getting nearly the traction that it ought to. I'm going to order Fred Barnes' book to get more details. Meanwhile, if this report is true, it's interesting to contemplate what that would say about the role of Bush science adviser John Marburger, who is supposed to be ensuring that the president is well informed about matters of science. Either way, the news doesn't look good for Marburger. On the one hand, if he arranged the…
cmooney | February 15, 2006I'm as happy as the next person that the Ohio Board of Education is backing down in the wake of the Dover trial decision, and will be getting rid of its silly anti-evolution lesson plan. However, I don't think evolution fans ought to be rejoicing too much--at least not yet.
If the Ohio board is willing to get rid of the lesson plan voluntarily, that means it doesn't have to be sued. But make no mistake: Had this one gone to court, it would have been a significantly tougher case than the Dover trial.
It's much easier to prove in court that Dover's introduction of "intelligent design" itself…
cmooney | February 13, 2006Apparently he did, at least according to Fred Barnes' new book, Rebel-in-Chief: Inside the Bold and Controversial Presidency of George W. Bush. I haven't read Barnes' book; I'm relying on a review of it by Ronald Brownstein, which includes the following:
Those who admire Bush will find plenty to celebrate in Barnes' portrayal of a president who is resolute and visionary, yet humble and pious. Perhaps inadvertently, Barnes also includes plenty of evidence likely to horrify those who oppose Bush (for instance, Barnes reports that the president fundamentally doesn't accept the theory of global…
cmooney | February 13, 2006I didn't end up giving my special comments about Charles Darwin at my talk last night; a snap judgment led me to decide that I would be wiser to dive right into my speech given the unexpected format of the event. So instead, I've decided to publish here what I had planned to say at the beginning of my talk. Here goes:
I'm no ace with numbers, so I may mess this up. But it's my understanding that, if he were still alive today, Charles Darwin would be 197 years old. It's hard not to play the game of imagining what he would think of us. I think it's safe to say that, though he might be dismayed…
cmooney | February 11, 2006I'm out here in the Rockies, speaking Sunday night at the University of Colorado in Boulder, and then on Monday night at the Tattered Cover bookstore in Denver. More info on both talks can be found here.The Sunday talk was prominently written up in the Boulder Daily Camera (in the "Religion" section, of all places). It will be an official "Darwin Day" speech, hosted by the Boulder International Humanist Institute, and I plan to include some special remarks about what Charles Darwin means to me. So, I hope anyone in the Denver area who's interested will try to come on out for one of these…
cmooney | February 10, 2006Tara has done a comprehensive takedown of Tom Bethell's "No African AIDS Epidemic" conspiracy theory. We must thank her profusely for this, folks, because there's an element of personal sacrifice here in service of the greater good: She actually had to engage seriously with wacky arguments in order to produce the post that she's offered us.Tara has better things to do, of course, but she took one for the team. Let's remember and appreciate that.
cmooney | February 10, 2006There's no longer any reason to feel sorry for this George Deutsch character. I had figured he might be a young guy in way over his head, and therefore worthy of our forgiveness or even sympathy. Well, forget it. Deutsch didn't know when to shut up and slink away. Now, in an attempt to "defend himself," he's dug a deeper hole with comments like this:
Speaking to a Texas radio station and then to The New York Times, Mr. Deutsch said the scientist, James E. Hansen, exaggerated the threat of warming and tried to cast the Bush administration's response to it as inadequate.
If Deutsch still thinks…
cmooney | February 9, 2006Apparently my appearance on the podcast show of the Center for Inquiry was pretty successful. Here's a link. And once again, for those in Boston/Cambridge, I'm speaking at Tufts tonight. Here's more info. Hope you can make it.
cmooney | February 8, 2006Folks, I suffered from a major computer crash today, which prevented me not just from blogging but even from posting others' comments. It was a stressful, hellish day, but I managed to recover somewhat towards the end, and now I'm semi-operational again.
Anyway, I won't be blogging more today, but I do want to let those in the Boston area know that I'll be speaking at the Tufts Fletcher School tomorrow night. More info here. Unfortunately, I I didn't get to practice my speech quite like I would've wanted to today due to the aforementioned technological catastrophe. It's a new one and, I think…
cmooney | February 7, 2006Andy Revkin is confirming a report, which originated on a blog, that NASA's now-notorious George Deutsch did not actually graduate from Texas A & M (as his resume had asserted). Revkin's also reporting that Deutsch has resigned from NASA. Ouch.
In a way, I feel sorry for Deutsch. I mean, who on earth put him in this situation? A presidential appointee, involved in controlling what scientists are saying? Clearly, James Hansen is right to observe that the issue is bigger than Deutsch. As he puts it in Revkin's story: "He's only a bit player...the problem is much broader and much deeper and…
cmooney | February 7, 2006PZ disagrees with my suggestions about strategies for defending evolution. More specifically, he disagrees that we should be using, as messengers, scientists who reconcile faith and evolution (aka Ken Miller) to reach the broader American public. As PZ puts it:
Why, sure. And the ideal messenger to reach the public on Democratic ideals is a moderate Republican. The way to win friends and persuade people is to dilute your message so much that you sound just like them. Baa-aaa-aa-a.
Ah, but are we diluting our message here? I don't think that we are. The goal, for me, is to "defend the teaching…
cmooney | February 7, 2006I'm pleased that the renowned Yale science historian Daniel Kevles has reviewed The Republican War on Science in the latest issue of The American Scientist. Here's the upshot, criticisms of yours truly fully included:
The Union of Concerned Scientists has a point in that during the administration of George W. Bush the politicization of science can be found in numerous areas of public policymaking far beyond defense. Chris Mooney informatively develops that argument in The Republican War on Science. A young political journalist, he is at times snide and polemical, but he has done a lot of…
cmooney | February 7, 2006I don't know a great deal about particulate pollution. But I am nevertheless not at all surprised that we're now having a political science fight over this subject. After all: 1) it's an environmental issue; 2) it's one where lots of industry dollars hinge upon what regulatory framework the EPA adopts; and 3) that regulatory framework in turn depends in part upon scientific information, much of which is, typically, rife with uncertainty. Add into that mix 4) the Bush administration, and it's pretty easy to predict what you're going to get.
Anyway, the details on the latest battle can be…
cmooney | February 7, 2006John Farrell has been helping to keep an eye out for outlandish claims made by Tom Bethell, author of the Politically Incorrect Guide to Science. It's hard to know what Bethell's most over-the-top view is, but I'd say two are in strong competition: 1) questioning the existence of an African AIDS epidemic; 2) questioning Einstein and relativity. (It's clear which of these views is the more "politically incorrect." Also, it really tells you something that Bethell's anti-evolutionism doesn't even top the list.)
But in any case, according to Farrell, Bethell isn't endorsing anti-Einstein…
cmooney | February 6, 2006Rightwing whining about "liberal" academia is nothing new. But I was particularly struck by this piece in Walker, Minnesota's Pilot Independent, which gripes about the fact that I was invited to speak at the University of Minnesota last October. My appearance is presented as stunning evidence of a liberal bias on campus. But the author fails to draw even the most elementary distinctions in order to support his argument. For example:
1. Invited campus speeches aren't the same thing as in-classroom teaching. Marked political bias in the former may simply reflect the political composition of a…
cmooney | February 6, 2006Via Tara, I see that a major media organ has finally contrasted Bush's "I Heart Science" message in his SOTU speech with the reality of how science has been treated in this administration:
Starting when he was a presidential candidate in 2000, George W. Bush has often assured voters that his policymaking would be guided by "sound science." Last week, in his State of the Union address, the President pointed to scientific research as the way to "lead the world in opportunity and innovation for decades to come." Yet growing numbers of researchers, both in and out of government, say their…
cmooney | February 6, 2006The Boulder Daily Camera has the latest on NASA PR flacks torquing findings in the field of climate science. It seems that sea ice experts at the University of Colorado are angry about the way NASA altered a press release announcing the results of their research--which, of course, showed declining sea ice extent and warned about feedbacks that could lead to still more rapid melting:
NASA and the CU data center had agreed to issue a joint press release. But NASA's release, which appeared several hours after CU's, differed in tone and content. Scambos' quotation about rapid ice decline did not…
cmooney | February 5, 2006More and more, we're seeing top level reporters in the prestige press rejecting the concept of phony "balance," and exposing nonsense when they see it. A great example comes in a recent Times story covering debate over an anti-evolution bill in Utah:
The Utah bill's main sponsor, State Senator D. Chris Buttars, a Republican from the Salt Lake City suburbs, said he was not surprised by the debate it had inspired. He said ordinary voters were deeply concerned about the teaching of evolution.
"I got tired of people calling me and saying, 'Why is my kid coming home from high school and saying his…
cmooney | February 4, 2006By now everyone has heard of George Deutsch, the creationist-friendly whippersnapper who decided he could tell James Hansen what to say and what not to say. Has ever a greater scientist had a less worthy oppressor? It's hard to think of an example.
PZ and John Lynch have more on Deutsch; he's all over the blogosphere now, famous in a way that I hope I will never be. I don't have much more to say about Andy Revkin's latest big scoop in the Times, except for the following recommendation to would-be NASA censors: Check out this agency website. It is chock full of offensive scientific facts that…
cmooney | February 4, 2006NASA whistleblower and leading climate scientist James Hansen has become more and more unmuzzled: He went on NPR's "On Point" yesterday and really didn't hold back. You should listen to the whole interview, but I must say that from my perspective, I found one part particularly interesting.
At around minute 26:30, Hansen is comparing political control of scientific information in this administration to the way things worked in previous administrations (of which he was a part). Here's the gist:
What I see is an increasing control of what scientists are able to say. There are political…