Cut Hawking some slack

I wasn't going to wade into the Stephen-Hawking-has-lost-it debate, but then I came across an otherwise unrelated story this morning pitting Cosmologist Numero Uno against the late Pope John Paul II.

For those unfamiliar with the fuss, Hawking had the nerve last week to publicly support the idea of colonizing the Moon and Mars because, he said, things are looking pretty dicy down here on Earth.

As Stein so eloquently put it at Dynamics of Cats, "Hawking is not being ridicilous. At worst he is being pessimistic about the time scale for major potential catastrophes, and optimistic on feasible time scales."

Yes, maybe Hawking is being unnecessarily alarmist. His suggestion that climate change could make the world uninhabitable for humans in the near future, for one thing, does not seem to have much scientific foundation. It is possible that we are on the verge of a positive-feedback cascade that triggers a new equilibrium quite a bit warmer than today's 15 C -- a paper in today's Science (here if you have access) lays out a frightening scenario involving the release of a trillion tonnes of carbon in the form of methane from melting permafrost. But the truth is we really don't have a good idea of how far away that threshold is.

Even if things are about to get really bad, my main objection to using the climate change justification to settle the solar system is that figuring out how to survive a much warmer Earth will probably be a lot easier and cheaper than doing the same in Moonbase Alpha or onMars.

But I am still willing to cut Hawking some slack. First, he's right about other, external threats. Just because Hollywood can't make a decent film about extinction-level asteroid impacts doesn't mean it's not something we should be thinking about.

More importantly, though, I don't think it's such a bad thing to let very smart people muse publicly about subjects that aren't safely within their field of expertise. Sometimes a keen mind is capable of spotting trends and identifying trouble spots before others who have devoted their lives to those very same problems. Which brings me to the news story that prompted this post.

Famed physicist Stephen Hawking said Thursday that Pope John Paul II tried to discourage him and other scientists attending a cosmology conference at the Vatican from trying to figure out how the universe began. (AP, June 15)

Not that there was ever a chance in hell that Hawking would have followed his holiness's advice, but I'm pleased to see Hawking has the guts to publicly diss a dead pope. And to see the story get so much media attention.

So go easy on the guy. I say he's earned the right to push the envelope. And I have to say much of the negative reaction I've read at Scienceblogs is further over the top than what Hawking said in the first place.

Tags

More like this

So Stephen Hawking spoke in defence of off-planet colonization and got pounced by, among others, a trio of tough sciencebloggers. Shelley, grrlscientist, and PZ. Also Chris Clarke... Sagrada Familia This is an interesting situation - Stephen is at the best of times terse. He is unlikely to expound…
The Pope is embroiled in a nasty mess over remarks he made in Regensburg, Germany, containing a quote from fifteenth century Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologus, made to a Persian (Muslim) emissary. It concerned violence as a way to spread one's faith: "Show me just what Muhammad brought that…
I guess even the Vatican responds to public pressure, if it's intense enough. Last week, I noted an extremely disturbing story, a story that outraged me, a story that I would have found even more disturbing were I still a practicing Catholic but that I found disturbing enough even though I no…
Tomorrow's lunar eclipse has got the moon on my brain, and I'm not the only one. Washinton Post columnist Charles Krauthammer gets it wrong so often that I rarely bother to even glace at his output, but today he touches on a topic that appeals more to intuition than intellect, one that doesn't lend…

Hear, hear! I, too, was surprised by the largely negative reactions from Sciencebloggers. I would have expected at least some of them to be a little more starry-eyed (pun intended) about human space colonization.

Frankly, I think Hawking is too optimistic about a moon colony in 20 years and a Mars colony in 40, unless he is including China and Japan in his predictions. We're otherwise occupied here in the US, and the Russians have issues, too.

What SEED needs here is a space science blogger, to compensate for the anti-Hawking, Space Cadet, crowd.

Since we have found tiny Black Holes in our solar system, it may be possible to build starships powered by Hawking radiation. The Star Trek that Hawking promotes is nearer than you think. How many books written in the 1940's said that humans would never reach the Moon? As a practical matter, we need to back up the human race.

It really doesn't matter whether one agrees with Hawking or not. Fact is that our current little craft is not going to last the biblical forever simply due to stellar evolution. Recognizing that and planning to do something about it may be the test for deciding whether humankind or whatever we happen to be in the distant future is worthy of surviving. It's just a matter of time!

If I lived in the same state the he does, I'd dream big too.