Comparing mainstream claims in science and technology and received wisdom in society with the published record, we defend honest, accomplished, independent minded and often heroic scientists (Peter Duesberg, Serge Lang, Harvey Bialy, Kary Mullis, Henry Bauer, Jim Watson, Peter Medawar, Erwin Chargaff, Richard Feynman, Linus Pauling, James Hansen, Fred Singer, Richard Lindzer, Rainer Plaga, Otto Rossler, Michio Kaku, David Rasnick, Rebecca Culshaw, Ernst Krebs, Mark Leggett, Adrian Kent) and their good science against the censorship, mudslinging, false arguments, ad hominem propaganda, overwhelming group prejudice and internal science politics of the paradigm wars of cancer, HIV/AIDS, evolution, global warming, collider physics, health, medicine and nutrition, as well as from time to time promoting truth in personal technology by identifying items of genuinely high quality from those whose reputation is unjustly magnified in the media.
This publication aims to measure truth only by the professional and scholarly literature in peer reviewed journals, well researched books, and the investigative reporting and reviews of thoughtful and informed if often unconventional academics, philosophers, researchers, scholars, authors, and journalists (John Lauritsen, Celia Farber, Liam Scheff, Robert Houston, Claus Jensen, Anthony Liversidge, James Blodgett, Jim Tankersley, John Tierney, Bob Herbert, Dennis Overbye, Marcus Cohen, Gary Null, Walter Wagner, Luis Sancho, Toby Ord and Eric Johnson) too often scorned, shortchanged or damned by publicly irresponsible scientists and other authorities living off the status quo. 
I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: “O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.” And God granted it. – VoltaireBig time New School conference on Politics and Science
But will it omit the the realpolitik of science itself? Probably.
Here’s a nice little jawfest at the New School this week, starting this morning. We intend to drop down and hear what this combustible mix has to say. Right wing and left, establishment and whistleblowers. That’s the kind of discussion the true academy exists to foster.
No doubt we will hear a few truths that the media lapdogs of the science estabishment would otherwise fail to print, if they live up to the description of South African novelist Rian Molan. He has memorably castigated the HIV?AIDS reporters of the world as “craven lickspittles of the press”.
That’s a little scathing and we would not suggest that most of the world science press are such slavish copiers of NIH and drug company handouts as are the AIDS reporters of the world.
But we do not expect that any of the esteemed members of these panels have read the AIDS literature for themselves or have any idea that science be distorted from within as violently as it can be distorted from without.
What is needed is a similar conference on the former topic. Will it happen? Given that there is a very important and remarkable expose of the shocking situation in HIV?AIDS about to be published in a very influential US magazine, perhaps there is another answer to this question other than the one which one would normally have to give, which is “No chance”.
New School Politics and Science Conference Feb 9-10 2006
New School Politics and Science Conferenmce Feb 9-10 2006
The increasing politicization of science can lead to policy decisions that run counter to accepted scientific consensus and risk endangering our health and well-being. Scientists and policy-makers from across the political spectrum will assess the current tension between politics and science and discuss how to increase the likelihood that the best science becomes the basis for future public policy.
A Social Research Conference
The New School , February 9 and 10, 2006
Contact Register Agenda Overview Speakers Links Hotels
Conference Agenda
(Speakers subject to change.)
Thursday, February 9
10:30 A.M. – 1:15 P.M.
Session I: Recent History: The Emerging Conflict between Politics and Science
Has the balance of power among the various interests that play a role in determining public policy changed? What changes have occurred in the influence of science? What are the consequences of these changes? What lessons can be learned from past successes and failures in creating public policy?
Rita Colwell, Chairman, Canon US Life Science, Inc.; Distinguished Professor, University of Maryland College Park and John Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health; Former Director, National Science Foundation
Henry Kelly, President, Federation of American Scientists
Daniel Kevles, Stanley Woodward Professor of History and Director of Graduate Studies, Program in History of Medicine, Yale University Graduate School of Arts and Sciences
Moderator: Gerald Holton, Mallinckrodt Research Professor of Physics and Research Professor of History of Science, Harvard University
2:15 P.M. – 5:00 P.M.
Session II: Health
What are the roles of scientific, political, religious, and corporate interests in the creation of health policy, for example reproductive health policy? Has the relationship among these forces changed? If so, what are the consequences for our well-being?
Eric Cohen, Director, Biotechnology and American Democracy Program, Ethics and Public Policy Center; Editor, The New Atlantis
M. Joycelyn Elders M.D., Distinguished Professor, College of Public Health, Professor Emeritus, College of Medicine, University of Arkansas School of Medical Sciences; Former United States Surgeon General
William Hurlbut, Consulting Professor, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University Medical Center, Member, President’s Council on Bioethics
John S. Santelli M.D., Professor and Chairman, Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family Health and Clinical Pediatrics, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University
Moderator: Bernard Goldstein, Professor and Former Dean, Univeristy of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health
5:00 P.M. – 6:00 P.M.
Reception
6:00 P.M. – 7:30 P.M.
Session III: Keynote Address by Neal Lane, Science Advisor to President Clinton; Former Director of the National Science Foundation
Why this conference now? How has the relationship between science and politics changed? Where have we been, where are we now, and where should we be going?
Q & A by Bob Kerrey, President, The New School; Former U.S. Senator from Nebraska
Friday February 10
10:00A.M. – 12:450 A.M.
Session IV: The Environment
What is the role of science and scientists in making environmental policy? What interests compete to create policies affecting the environment? Has the balance among them changed? If so, how? What are the consequences?
Paul Ehrlich, President, Center for Conservation Biology; Bing Professor of Population Studies, Stanford University
James E. Hansen, Director, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies
Steven F. Hayward, F. K. Weyerhaeuser Fellow, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research; Senior fellow, Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy
Michael Oppenheimer, Albert G. Milbank Professor of Geosciences and International Affairs and Director, Program in Science, Technology and Environmental Policy, Princeton University
Moderator: Dawn Rittenhouse, Director, Sustainable Development, Dupont
1:45 P.M. – 4:30 P.M.
Session V: Energy: Technology and Sources of Power
What is the role of science and scientists in making energy policy? Has this changed, and if so, how? If a change has occurred, is it a matter of the relative influence of scientists, corporations and politicians? How are the issues tied to new trends in globalization? What are the consequences of these changes?
Paul Gilman, Director, Oak Ridge Center for Advanced Studies at ORNL; Former Science Advisor, United States Environmental Protection Agency
Kurt Gottfried, Professor Emeritus of Physics, Cornell University; Co-founder and Chair, Union of Concerned Scientists
Martin Hoffert, Professor Emeritus of Physics, New York University
William F. Martin, Chairman, Washington Policy & Analysis; Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee, United States Department of Energy
Moderator: Henry Kelly, President, Federation of American Scientists
5:00 P.M. – 7:00 P.M.
Session VI: Round-table Discussion
What needs to be done now, and by whom or by what institutions, in order to ensure that good science leads to good public policy that best serves the needs of the American public? How can we change the current situation so that scientists and scientific findings have more influence? How can we improve the policy decision-making process?
Robert P. George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director, James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions, Princeton University; Member, President’s Council on Bioethics
Bernard Goldstein, Professor and Former Dean, Univeristy of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health
David Goldston, Chief of Staff, House Committee on Science
Rush Holt, US Representative from New Jersey
Rick Piltz, Director, Climate Science Watch; Former Senior Associate, US Climate Change Science Program
Ellis Rubinstein, President and CEO, New York Academy of Science
Philip M. Smith, Smith Science Policy & Management; Former Executive Officer, National Research Council
Albert H. Teich, Director of Science & Policy Programs, American Association for the Advancement of Science
Ruth Wooden, President, Public Agenda
Moderator: Ira Flatow, Host, Talk of The Nation: Science Friday; Science Correspondent, National Public Radio
The New SchoolThe New School Divisions
Contact Register Agenda Overview Speakers Links Hotels
February 11th, 2006 at 2:00 pm
“Will it omit the realpolitik of science itself?” Come, now,
Truthseeker, you know it will! This is a cat fight between those who already control the politics of science and those who would control it, between the mannered Ivy League overlords and the Mountain State wannabes. Whatever the outcome, the loser will be Science itself.
February 12th, 2006 at 11:13 am
Certainly the Ivy League overlords, East and West, were present in force on stage at this extraordinary event.
We will be posting on it today when time permits and when we recover from the two foot snowstorm which has imposed a blanket of silence on Central Park neighborhoods with a historic 22 inches and counting.
It is not the snowstorm itself which is oppressive, of courss – two feet of snow is a beautiful brake on New York City excess, for the most part. It is the blizzard of “an historic”s which is flying from the mouths of commentators.