Friday, July 8, 2005
Who among us has not engaged in disputes over research
findings? Disagreements between researchers are a normal part of the
scientific process. The success and credibility of science is anchored in
the willingness of scientists to make their data and methods available
to other scientists for independent testing. Openness is a sacred
obligation. However, three scientists, who have had their share of such
disputes, recently received letters from Representative Joe Barton (R-TX),
chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, demanding complete
records, going back 10 years, of their paleoclimate work, including
computer codes and a list of all studies on which they were authors
and the source of funding --- by next Monday. Their climate studies,
which support global warming, figured prominently in the 2001 report of
the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. It seems unlikely
that Rep Barton plans to repeat their studies; his record of support
for environmental legislation is 0%. Barton is, however, among the
top recipients of campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry,
and the aggressive tone of his letters sounds to most scientists like
an effort to intimidate.
When APS
first opened a tiny Washington Office in 1984, it said "American Physical
Society" on the door. I ran into a lawyer who had an office on the same
floor, "You're the Physical Society guy aren't you? I'd like to come
by and talk to you; I need to lose about 20 pounds." I stepped back
and looked him over, "closer to 40 I'd say." In any case, our name
causes confusion. It would have been better if it had been done 100
years ago, but it's not going to get any easier, so the Executive Board
voted unanimously to poll the membership changing the public name of the
society to American Physics Society. So far, about 75% favor the change.
The 1966 Freedom of Information Act was a tribute to the self-confidence
of our nation. No other nation has anything like it. But agencies
hate it, and keep finding new loopholes that have to be plugged,
(WN 2 Sep 94). Last week, the Federation
of American Scientists filed a lawsuit charging that the National
Reconnaissance Office has been hiding unclassified budget records
by invoking the "operational files" exemption. "Operational files"
refers to records that document how foreign intelligence is collected,
which these files aren't.
In yesterday's New York Times, Cardinal Schoenborn, editor of the official
Catechism, rejected John Paul II's supposed acceptance of neo-Darwinism
when he said evolution was "more than just a hypothesis." Schoeborn goes
on to quote Pope Benedict XVI, "We are not some casual and meaningless
product of evolution." Well, that's it, if we believe in science we're
on our own. On the other hand, the Church's position is evolving.
|
