Friday, September 17, 2010
Print news seems headed for extinction, displaced by virtually
instantaneous e-news. E-news comes to us from all over the world by way
of satellite communications and is relayed by hundreds of TV channels,
Google, Wikipedia, countless blogs, cell phones, smart phones, tweets,
etc. Most of these sources don't even have an editor. Timely information
is important, but some of it is simply wrong. Is this part of some
sinister plan? There is no plan. Trust me, E-news sources simply evolve.
It's remarkably similar to Darwinian evolution. Science creates mutations
in the form of new communications devices, and the public does the "natural
selection" by deciding which devices they prefer. The public, however,
often prefers to be entertained rather than informed. Thus it is that
the respected news industry is being subsumed within the entertainment
industry. In the Age of Science more news time by far is devoted to
celebrity gossip.
The new report emphasizes environmental causes of cancer, most of which
are chemical. It does call for a reduction in exposure to "electromagnetic
radiation" from medical x-rays, but at least in press accounts, fails to
make clear that x-ray wavelengths are millions of times shorter than the
photoelectric threshold in the near ultraviolet, which is also the cancer
threshold. Cell phone radiation, in which wavelengths are a million times
longer than the photoelectron threshold also got a mention: "In this
regard, the use of cell phones and other wireless technology is of great
concern. There is no research to support a link to cancer and contemporary
cell phone use, but the research on cancer and other disease risk from
modern wireless devices is extremely limited and cancer, and identifying
those mechanisms." The panel urged additional research on the possible
links between electromagnetic fields and disease. This is the staple,
more-research-is-needed line. The public deserves a clear statement of what is
known in language they can understand, both from the media and the science
establishment.
Last week I defended the right of a barely coherent Baptist preacher to
burn the Koran, or for that matter the Holy Bible or any other religious
text. "Why shouldn't he as long as he pays for the books and doesn't
violate any municipal burning ordinance?" Some thought that line was
irresponsible. I have never burned a Koran or a Holy Bible, but I defend
anyone's right to do so. Thousands of Americans have died and are still
dying to defend the Constitution. I stand with them. Meanwhile, in
Damascus, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei accused the US government of
orchestrating desecrations of the Koran with about 1000 protesters
chanting death to America. There were also riots over the non-burning in
Kashmir, but there are always Muslim riots in Kashmir.
|
