I'm not sure it's the scientists' fault. Many minds are made up before we get a chance to actually "teach" the public.
We have a major public relations problem. Science offers everlasting doubt. Religion offers everlasting life. Some can handle the former, others deeply desire the latter. Most believe what they want despite the educational opportunities presented to them. To make matters worse, most people are fed an unending diet of Bible stories from birth. By the time they are first exposed to science, they are already filled to the brim with simplistic notions of the inerrancy of "Word of God." Their minds are set long before they are exposed to scientists such as Francis Collins who can talk eloquently and at length about the possibility of reconciling religious belief and the pursuit of scientific knowledge. For most, science education starts out with emphasis on memorization of trivia to help students get good scores on standardized tests -- the idea of science as a process of gaining knowledge is weakly presented, if it is presented at all. Then students arrive in college, and we are handed people lacking in fundamentals who approach learning as a collector approaches baseball cards -- a checklist that if you acquire enough items on it, you earn an "A." When we ask students to think for themselves, they are terrified. They've never been trained -- even worse, they've never been encouraged -- to do so before. Let's be honest, the people making educational (and other) policy in this nation really don't want the public to think. If more of the public did, those policymakers would be unemployed. The people making economic policy in this nation likewise don't want the public to think. If more of the public did, fewer would blow their life's income purchasing products they don't need. Coal is good. Women will find me devastatingly attractive if I use the right deodorant. I really, really need that PlayStation 3, so I'll camp out at the store for a week to get one. In the checkout line at the the grocery store, we can choose between a Time magazine with a cover story about the extinction crisis, or choose Celebrity Tripe Weekly with a cover story about some actress discussing her latest boob (with pictures!). Which one do you think would sell the most? Frankly, I think most members of the scientific community are doing their best. But we have only sandbags to pile up in advance of an oncoming glacier. For me, I keep piling the sandbags. With any luck, I'll convince more to stand by me and help pile more. But for most of us, progress in this effort resembles gradualism -- tiny changes over vast amounts of time -- more than catastrophism -- vast changes over tiny amounts of time. No matter what we do, we will not have the immediate effect of the catastrophic forces in society. Dave ------------------------------------------------------ David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] USA | http: http://fuzzo.com ------------------------------------------------------ "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo "No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan -----Original Message----- From: Kelly Decker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 9:04 PM To: David M. Lawrence; ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: Inaugural Call for Papers for the International Journal of Creation Research (IJCR). Thank you for your good work, David. I certainly agree that these journals have been around a long time. But your contention that their impact is "nil" only pertains to the scientific field. I have heard parroted findings from the institute in Ohio, Arcata, and Napa. They are issuing talking points, and they are having an effect. Would you now care to address the underlying concern wit hthe original post? That we are not doing a good job of educating the public? A March 2007 Newsweek poll state that only 48% of americans believe that Evolution is supported by scientific evidence and accepted by the scientific community; 39% disagree; and 13% said they didn't know. That's kind of dismal, don't you think? Those people who do the damage get their ammunition and talking points from places like ICR. This is a real problem. It's an active disinformation campaign. I am not suggesting hysteria, just that people in science stop letting misinformation pass by without being answered. (Not you personally, all scientists) If more of us do that, there's less work. I write back and forth with both Global Warming deniers and Evolution deniers in my local paper. It's exhausting. K
