Friday, December 1, 2006

1. FRAUD IN SCIENCE: SCIENCE MAGAZINE HAS DELIVERED A RESPONSE.

It is not unethical to be wrong. Every scientist will at times be wrong, but we assume that authors of science papers THINK they got it right. The rewards of success are so high in certain areas, however, that it must be tempting to guess the answer without doing the research. We saw it in 2002 with Jan Hendrik Schoen at Bell Labs, and again in 2004 with the stem cell work of Woo Suk Hwang at Seoul National University. In the Hwang case, Science, which published the work, immediately retracted the two papers and began a thorough review of the peer review procedure. The report urges scientists to give special attention to research results that are especially visible or influential. Today, in a Science editorial, Donald Kennedy invites comments.

2. INCONVENIENT REFUSAL: SO MAYBE SCIENCE TEACHERS LIKE IT HOT.

If you haven't seen it, Al Gore made a film about global warming. It received overwhelming endorsement by scientists. On Sunday, the Wash Post ran an opinion piece by Laurie David, a producer of the film. She thought it was educational. Of course, so did the Discovery Institute when it distributed, Unlocking “The Mystery of Life: The Scientific Case for Intelligent Design.” When the company that made Inconvenient Truth offered the National Science Teachers Association 50,000 free DVDs for use in classrooms, the NSTA said “no.” I wouldn't want them pushing Mystery of Life either, but NSTA seemed more worried about its “capital campaign” contributors, including Exxon, Shell and the coal industry.

3. EXPORTING CREATIONISM: NO LONGER JUST AN AMERICAN PROBLEM?

For years American scientists endured the barbs of colleagues in Europe about fundamentalist Christianity in the US. A Special Report in Nature this week warns that creationism is beginning to threaten science in Europe. Teaching creationism in public schools was outlawed by the Supreme Court in 1968 in Epperson v. Arkansas. It has been in retreat ever since with one name change after another. The latest was “intelligent design.” Meanwhile, the UK is finding it necessary to teach remedial evolution to college students. Turks, and Islamic immigrants throughout Europe, cannot imagine anything happening except by God hand.

4. THE LIMITS OF GROWTH: BEWARE OF THOSE EXPONENTIALS.

Yesterday in the NY Times, Thomas Homer-Dixon reminded us of a famous wager 26 years ago. Nobel Prize winner Paul Ehrlich bet the price of certain metals would increase in a decade as they were depleted. The late Julian Simon, a U. Maryland professor, bet they would get cheaper as substitutes and new deposits were found. Simon won. He asked me why the physicists had all bet with Ehrlich. “Because, Julian, they understand exponentials,” I said. Today, Homer-Dixon points out, Ehrlich would win easily.

Bob Park can be reached via email at whatsnew@bobpark.org
THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND
Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the University, but they should be.