It’s Dangerous to Doubt Good Science

According to a recent study reported on in LiveScience, more Americans doubt evolution than any of 34 other nations except Turkey. You may say, so what. You may say, what difference does it make if so many Americans wish to remain ignorant.

But it’s dangerous to doubt good science, and here’s why. In the first place, as we’ve seen in scattered places around the country, when those who refute evolution gain seats on school boards, they attempt to force their beliefs on school curriculae. If they succeed, they wind up having a religious viewpoint taught in classrooms, either confusing students or denying them access to a good, complete education. This can have a long-term negative effect by making these students less competitive in the workforce. It can stunt minds and inhibit inquiry.

There’s another danger too, and I have a hunch it would be exposed by a more comprehensive study. I’d be willing to bet that the study I have in mind would reveal that a higher percentage of those who do not accept evolution also do not accept the reality of global warming. And the danger in that is all too obvious.

The two go hand in hand. Creationists generally believe that the earth is only a few thousand years old. We know that’s not true — which is why we know that what happened millions of years ago is affecting what’s happening today. We know that over many millenia vast amounts of carbon were trapped below the surface of the earth as fossil fuel, only to be released back into the atmosphere in a tiny fraction of the time it took to accumulate. The creation theory would not allow for this to have happened.

One need not be pondering a career as a scientist to require a reasonable understanding of good science. But such an understanding is necessary to become a good citizen of the planet.

Scientists are Necessarily Cautious

A sobering story in yesterday’s Washington Post says that there is growing consensus among scientists that this year’s extended heat wave is another sign of global warming. But, according to Daniel C. Esty, a professor of environmental law and policy at Yale University, “The trend lines showing so much hot weather in recent years suggests some concern, even if we can’t say definitively this is a signal of climate change.”

Esty’s remark reflects not confusion but caution, which is good science, not bad. Scientists know all too well that whenever they make observations on the record, their credibility is at stake — and if they are to be taken seriously they must leave room for error.

This is what distinguishes good scientists from bad ones. And there are plenty of bad ones. There are bad scientists who refute out of hand the probability that global warming is a reality. There are bad scientists who blur the issue by raising doubt in the face of overwhelming evidence that they are wrong.

The debate over global warming is in some ways comparable to the debate over evolution. Evolutionary scientists are just as cautious as their peers in climate study. Not so the proponents of creationism and intelligent design. These scientists stubbornly craft scientific theories to fit the bible while ignoring scientific evidence and observation. Their research takes them not into the field but into the pages of Genesis.

It’s long been clear to me that something is amiss. I began to notice changes a few years after moving to central North Carolina from New York in the mid-1970s. At first I enjoyed the short, mild winters that were followed by long, balmy springs. But during the 1980s, springs seemed to be getting shorter, with summers arriving earlier and tending to be more brutal. And during those summers, I noticed that the nights didn’t cool down as much as they did in the few years following my arrival.

And this may be a key to the heat-wave phenomenon. According to the Post story, “…researchers at the National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., reported this week that nighttime summer temperatures across the country have been unusually high for the past eight years, a record streak.” And you don’t have to be a scientist to understand that when it doesn’t cool down as much at night, the day starts out hotter.

When the idea of global warming was first advanced in the late 1980s, scientists were careful not to predict the ramifications. One thing they offered was the likelihood of changes in weather patterns. We see this happening now.

I’m glad scientists are cautious, and I appreciate informed debate. Gradually, as more and more evidence is uncovered, the nature of the consensus will change. But nothing — NOTHING — in their caution suggests we ignore the trends and delay action. There is no agreement on when we might reach a point of no return, but what’s becoming increasingly clear is that we may be approaching it. No one at this point is saying it’s already too late — and I hope it isn’t. Some may say we won’t see the worst of it in our lifetimes, but what we’re now seeing is bad enough.

Much Ado About Stem Cells

Congress just passed a bill that would allow federal funding of stem-cell research, but not quite by a margin wide enough to override the president’s veto — which, by the way, was his first veto since his administration took office. You may wonder why the president used his veto power for the first time on a bill that seems to hold such great hope for cures of some of the most heart-breaking diseases and illnesses. Well, in his simple mind, the answer is simple. Research would require the destruction of a human embryo, and a human embryo is life. At the veto ceremony, he was surrounded by children who as embryos had been adopted and ultimately born. Not present were the countless frozen embryos that will never be adopted, that will instead be discarded.

Perhaps the president didn’t think of this when he made his politically charged decision. Perhaps he thinks when these unwanted frozen embryos are discarded they will reside eternally in some paradise somewhere. Probably not though. In all likelihood, when these embryos are discarded, they will thaw and decompose rapidly. That’s right — they will die. Not only will they fail to develop into a fully formed human beings after nine months, they will not save a single life nor help cure an incurable condition. They will not heal the chronically ill or repair a single permanently damaged person. These unwanted embryos will simply go to waste — condemned to eternal uselessness by a president who believes he understands the meaning of life.

So stick to your guns, Mr. President. Let these unwanted, unneeded frozen embryos die in vain. Think of them as you think of the thousands of young men and women you’ve sent to Iraq, also to die in vain.