Science Guardian

Truth, beauty and paradigm power in science and society

I am Nicolaus Copernicus, and I approve of this blog

News, views and reviews measured against professional literature in peer reviewed journals (adjusted for design flaws and bias), well researched books, authoritative encyclopedias (not the bowdlerized Wiki entries on controversial topics) and the investigative reporting and skeptical studies of courageous original thinkers among academics, philosophers, researchers, scholars, authors, filmmakers and journalists.

Supporting the right of exceptional minds to free speech, publication, media coverage and funding against the crowd prejudice, leadership resistance, monetary influences and internal professional politics of the paradigm wars of cancer, HIV(not)AIDS, evolution, global warming, cosmology, particle physics, macroeconomics, information technology, religions and cults, health, medicine, diet and nutrition.



Halton C. Arp wki/obit/txt/vds/txt/txt/bk/bk, Henry Bauer txt/blg/ blg/bks/bk/txt/bk/vd, John Beard bk, Harvey Bialy bk/bk/txt/txt/rdo/vd, John Bockris bio/txt/ltr/bk, Donald W. Braben, Peter Breggin ste/fb/col/bks, Darin Brown txt/txt/txt/txt/txt/vd, Giordano Bruno bk/bio/bio, Frank R. Buianouckas, Stanislav Burzynski mov, Erwin Chargaff bio/bk/bio/prs, James Chin bk/vd, Nicolaus Copernicus bk, Mark Craddock, Francis Crick vd, Paul Crutzen, Marie Curie, Rebecca Culshaw txt/bk, Roger Cunningham, Charles Darwin txts/bk, Erasmus Darwin txt//bk/txt/hse/bks, Peter Duesberg ste/ste/bk/txt/vd/vd, Freeman Dyson, Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman bio, John Fewster, Rosalind Franklin, Bernard Forscher tx, Galileo Galilei, Walter Gilbert vd, Goethe bio/bk/bio, Nicolas Gonzalez tlk/rec/stetxt/txt, Patricia Goodson txt/bk/bk, Alec Gordon, James Hansen, Etienne de Harven bk/txt/vd, Alfred Hassig intw/txt, Robert G. Houston txt, Steven Jonas vd, Edward Jenner txt, Benjamin Jesty, Adrian Kent vd, Thomas Kuhn, Fred Kummerow, Stefan Lanka txt/txt/vd, Serge Lang, John Lauritsen vd, Paul Lauterbur vd, Mark Leggett, Richard Lindzen, James Lovelock, Andrew Maniotis, Lynn Margulis, Barbara McClintock, Christi Meyer vd, George Miklos, Marco Mamone Capria, Peter Medawar, Luc Montagnier txt/txt/vd, Kary Mullis, Linus Pauling prs/vd/vd, Eric Penrose, Roger Penrose vd, Max Planck, Rainer Plaga, David Rasnick bio/vd/bk, Robert Root-Bernstein vd, Sherwood Rowland, Otto Rossler, Harry Rubin, Marco Ruggiero txt/txt/intw/vd, Bertrand Russell Carl Sagan vd, Erwin Schrodinger, Fred Singer, Barbara Starfield txt, Gordon Stewart txt/txt, Richard Strohman, Thomas Szasz, Nicola Tesla bio/bio, Charles Thomas intw/vd, Frank Tipler, James Watson vd/vd, Alfred Wegener vd, Edward O. Wilson vd.


Jad Adams bk, Marci Angell bk/txt/txt/txt, Clark Baker ste/txt/rdo/vd, James Blodgett, Tony Brown vd, Hiram Caton txt/txt/txt/bk/ste, Jonathan Collin ste , Marcus Cohen, David Crowe vd, Margaret Cuomo, Stephen Davis BK/BK,/rdo, Michael Ellner vd, Elizabeth Ely txt/txt/ste, Epicurus, Dean Esmay, Celia Farber bio/txt/txt/txt/vd, Jonathan Fishbein txt/txt/wk, T.C.Fry, Michael Fumento, Max Gerson txt, Charles Geshekter vd, Michael Geiger, Roberto Giraldo, David Healy txt, Bob Herbert, Mike Hersee ste/rdo, Neville Hodgkinson txt /vd, James P. Hogan, Richard Horton bio/vd/vd, Christopher Hitchens, Eric Johnson, Claus Jensen vd, Phillip Johnson, Coleman Jones vds, William Donald Kelley, Ernst T. Krebs Sr txt, Ernst T. Krebs Jr. txt,/bio/txt/txt/ltr, Paul Krugman, Brett Leung MOV/ste/txt/txt/tx+vd/txt, Katie Leishman, Anthony Liversidge blg/intv/intv/txt/txts/txt/intv/txt/vd/vd, Bruce Livesey txt, James W. Loewen, Frank Lusardi, Nathaniel Lehrman vd, Christine Maggiore bk/ste/rec/rdo/vd, Rouben Mamoulian txt/txt/txt/txt/txt/doc/flm/flm, Noreen Martin vd, Robert Maver txt/itw, Eric Merola MOV, Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, Michael Moore bio/MOV/MOV/MOV, Gordon Moran, Ralph Nader bk, Ralph Moss txt/blg/ste/bks, Gary Null /txt/rdo/vd, Dan Olmsted wki, Toby Ord vd, Charles Ortleb bk/txt/bk/intw/flm, Neenyah Ostrom bk, Dennis Overbye, Mehmet Dr Oz vd, Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos ste/vd, Maria Papagiannidou bk, Thomas Piketty bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk/bk, Robert Pollin txt/vd/bk, Jon Rappoport bio/bk/bk/ste/bk/bk/vd, Janine Roberts bk/bk, Luis Sancho vd, Liam Scheff ste/txt/bk/bk/rdio/vd, John Scythes, Casper Schmidt txt/txt, Joan Shenton vd/vd, Joseph Sonnabend vd, John Stauber, David Steele, Joseph Stiglitz bk/txt, Will Storr rdo Wolfgang Streeck, James P. Tankersley ste, Gary Taubes vd, Mwizenge S. Tembo, John Tierney vd, Michael Tracey, Valendar Turner rec, Jesse Ventura bk, Michael Verney-Elliott bio/vds/vd, Voltaire, Walter Wagner, Andrew Weil vd, David Weinberger bio/bk/blg/blg/BK/bk/pds, Robert Willner bk/txt/txt/vd, Howard Zinn.

I am Albert Einstein, and I heartily approve of this blog, insofar as it seems to believe both in science and the importance of intellectual imagination, uncompromised by out of date emotions such as the impulse toward conventional religious beliefs, national aggression as a part of patriotism, and so on.   As I once remarked, the further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge.   Certainly the application of the impulse toward blind faith in science whereby authority is treated as some kind of church is to be deplored.  As I have also said, the only thing that ever interfered with my learning was my education. I am Freeman Dyson, and I approve of this blog, but would warn the author that life as a heretic is a hard one, since the ignorant and the half informed, let alone those who should know better, will automatically trash their betters who try to enlighten them with independent thinking, as I have found to my sorrow in commenting on "global warming" and its cures.
Many people would die rather than think – in fact, they do so. – Bertrand Russell.

The progress of science is strewn, like an ancient desert trail, with the bleached skeletons of discarded theories which once seemed to possess eternal life. - Arthur Koestler

One should as a rule respect public opinion in so far as is necessary to avoid starvation and to keep out of prison. – Bertrand Russell

Fraud and falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it. - Samuel Johnson

A sudden bold and unexpected question doth many times surprise a man and lay him open. – Sir Francis Bacon (1561 – 1626)

He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. – John Stuart Mill

Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform. – Mark Twain

Although science has led to the generally high living standards that most of the industrialized world enjoys today, the astounding discoveries underpinning them were made by a tiny number of courageous, out-of-step, visionary, determined, and passionate scientists working to their own agenda and radically challenging the status quo. – Donald W. Braben

An old error is always more popular than a new truth. — German Proverb

I am Richard Feynman and I approve of this blog

When even the brightest mind in our world has been trained up from childhood in a superstition of any kind, it will never be possible for that mind, in its maturity, to examine sincerely, dispassionately, and conscientiously any evidence or any circumstance which shall seem to cast a doubt upon the validity of that superstition. I doubt if I could do it myself. – Mark Twain

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his income depends on his not understanding it. – Upton Sinclair

A clash of doctrines is not a disaster, but an opportunity. - Alfred North Whitehead

Fraud and falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it. – Samuel Johnson

Man’s mind cannot grasp the causes of events in their completeness, but the desire to find those causes is implanted in man’s soul. And without considering the multiplicity and complexity of the conditions any one of which taken separately may seem to be the cause, he snatches at the first approximation to a cause that seems to him intelligible and says: “This is the cause!” – Leo Tolstoy

The evolution of the world tends to show the absolute importance of the category of the individual apart from the crowd. - Soren Kierkegaard

Who does not know the truth is simply a fool, yet who knows the truth and calls it a lie is a criminal. – Bertold Brecht

How easily the learned give up the evidence of their senses to preserve the coherence of ideas in their imagination. – Adam Smith

Education consists mainly in what we have unlearned. – Mark Twain

The mind likes a strange idea as little as the body likes a strange protein and resists it with similar energy. If we watch ourselves honestly, we shall often find that we have begun to argue against a new idea even before it has been completely stated. – Arthur Koestler

Whenever the human race assembles to a number exceeding four, it cannot stand free speech. – Mark Twain

People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. - Adam Smith

There isn’t anything so grotesque or so incredible that the average human being can’t believe it. – Mark Twain

He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that. – John Stuart Mill

It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere. – Voltaire

People are generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come into the mind of others.- Blaise Pascal.

Illusion is the first of all pleasures. – Voltaire

The applause of a single human being is of great consequence. – Samuel Johnson

(Click for more Unusual Quotations on Science and Human Nature)

Important: This site is best viewed in LARGE FONT, and in Firefox for image title visibility (place cursor on pics to reveal comments) and layout display. Click the title of any post to get only that post and its Comments for printing. All posts guaranteed fact checked according to reference level cited, typically the original journal studies. Full guide to site purpose, layout and how to print posts out is in the lower blue section at the bottom of the home page.
---Admin AL/E/ILMK---

New York Times calls creationist teaching “lunacy” – but not AIDS

With the eight members of the school board in Dover, Pa. who were pushing for Intelligent Design as part of the curriculum abruptly given the royal boot at the polls, the New York Times editorial board is moved today (Fri Nov 10) to call the whole idea “lunacy.”

We are somewhat disappointed at the failure of the iniative since as noted earlier we strongly support the teaching of ID along with evolution in every school from kindergarten thru K12. Our reason is simple enough. Even the youngest schoolkid will surely notice the difference between the hours the teachers will have to devote to evolution to get across its basics, and the thirty seconds it will take to teach the whole of ID ie a single sentence along the lines of “The things we don’t understand in evolution are due to the intervention of God, and we have no idea how He does it.”

The editorial points out, however, that there is still a state-wide problem in Kansas, where the State Board of Education has left evolution in the curriculum “science standards”, but added criticisms of the theory and changed the definition of ‘science’ to allow supernatural causes.

… the current board has narrowly approved new science standards that leave evolution in place but add specific criticisms that schools are urged to teach. Most significant, the definition of science is changed so it is not limited to natural explanations.

The standards, which define the material to be covered in statewide science tests, won’t take effect until 2007 at the earliest. That leaves time for the electorate to once again dump the board members responsible for this lunacy.

Strong word, ‘lunacy’. We applaud this decisive rejection of part of the trendy modern effort to merge science and religion on an “I’m OK You’re OK” basis. That is to say, when the Times goes so far as to call this creeping merger of the two in the realm of classroom teaching “lunacy”, we take it as indicating that they have no interest whatsoever in appeasing the religious wherever good science should rule unsullied by unprovable fantasy.

What we would like to know now is, does this principle apply also to the pages of the Times?

That is to say, given this editorial writer’s impressive, take-no-prisoners stand on behalf of good science dare we suggest that the Times editors now turn and examine their own coverage of science in the field of HIV?AIDS, and make sure that a similar unwarranted merging of science and religion hasn’t taken hold in its own pages?

After all, we have now had two decades of uncritical coverage slavishly conveying to the readers of the Times the inconsistent, irrational, unproven, and unproductive claims of the HIV?AIDS paradigm, a gospel which was barely launched back in the eighties before it was subjected to withering and apparently intellectually fatal criticism in review articles in Cancer Research and the Proceedings of the National Academy, peer-reviewed articles which were never directly answered by any peer-reviewed response in the same journals.

Has there ever been any acknowledgement by the Times of this wholesale refutation of HIV?AIDS theory, an unrefuted refutation which has been visible in the best scientific literature for twenty years, and frequently updated? Barely. We would certainly bet that no Times reader has readily got that idea from the Times coverage of HIV?AIDS, which has mentioned its existence hardly five times in the nineteen years since.

On the contrary, the Times’ reporting has seen fit to dismiss skepticism in HIV?AIDS science virtually out of hand whenever it has mentioned it, which is seldom, meanwhile including the phrase “HIV the virus that causes AIDS” like some kind of instructional mantra in every article it publishes on the topic of AIDS.

What politics is it that moves the Times editors to back the ruling paradigm in AIDS and scorn the critique when (we would bet) none of them have the level of expertise in the field of the chief heretic in AIDS science, Peter Duesberg of Berkeley, and none of them (we would bet) have read much if any of the critique, let alone considered it with the level of attention that it deserves?

What hubris is it that moves the editors of the newspaper of record to squelch the professional curiosity that should be aroused by the enduring challenge in the best scientific literature to the paradigm in HIV?AIDS sustained by a Berkeley scientist of impeccable reputation, whose papers have never otherwise been challenged, a member of the National Academy whose achievements were acknowledged in a letter in Nature to be worthy of a Nobel?

How is it that these editors in their wisdom prefer to accept the view of scientists and bureaucrats who benefit in reputation, position and money from their support of this repeatedly questioned paradigm, and dispense with any reporting on the scientists who despite great penalty in each of these dimensions stick to their guns in rejecting the paradigm even as it spreads like a giant psychedelic mushroom to cover the entire globe?

How very sophisticated they must be, these Times editors, to know without much research or expertise in the science of the field, but using their brilliantly illuminating intuition born of years of reporting and editing in other fields, so clearly to see that the established, universally believed and funded paradigm must be valid, and the objections of a few thousand holdouts, however credentialed, not worth reporting.

(A list of those who support a review of HIV?AIDS science on the ground that the science currently makes no sense is here. Those who have gone on record with worthwhile quotes are here, with the quotes.)

How uncannily the Times editors have found the right way through this thicket of scientific reasoning, despite their lack of personal research and absence of Times reporting on an issue that they have hardly investigated in print even though it involves the welfare of millions around the world and the expenditure of billions in public and private funds based on this paradigm which they perceive so unerringly must be correct.

How astonishing that they know the correct answer even though their own news stories contain enough challenges to common sense that one would think that any editor dealing with them would at least ask what the heck was going on, if not actually smell a rat. One example, obvious to any thinking reader, is the extraordinary discrepancy between AIDS as gay plague in the US and in Europe, and as heterosexual pandemic in Africa and elsewhere in the world.

Apparently, however, the editors of the Times are too busy playing office politics or too addled by the cosy sensation of insider status flowing from their position and the close connection of their chief AIDS reporter, Larry Altman, to the CDC that trained him, and too pleased at their respectful treatment by the officials of the NIH led by Anthony “Don’t dare mention Duesberg” Fauci, to have noticed that the HIV?AIDS theoretical monster has two heads facing in opposite directions.

One would think that in the aftermath of Judith Miller’s somewhat misleading pre-war reporting on the chances of Saddam Hussein’s hiding weapons of mass destruction, and her final exit this week, only slightly less embarrassing than the wreckage done to the Times’ reputation for accuracy by the antics of Jason Blair, that executive editor Bill Keller, managing editor Jill Abrahamson and other key editors might be open to hints that they review the performance of their AIDS reporters.

It is in this spirit of optimism that we are drafting a less impolite version of this post to send to these media princes and princesses in the dim hope that they might act. But we are not betting on it.


The New York Times

November 10, 2005


Evolution and the Electorate

Voters in Dover, Pa., came to their senses this week and tossed out almost the entire school board, which had tried to discredit the theory of evolution and steer students toward the theory of “intelligent design” – the idea that life forms are so complex that a higher being must have made them. Let’s hope the voters in Kansas follow suit next year by ejecting several benighted members of the State Board of Education, which has just approved new science standards that open the way for supernatural explanations of natural phenomena.

The Dover schools are the first in the nation to require that attention be paid to intelligent design. Administrators read a brief statement to biology classes asserting that evolution was only a theory, that intelligent design provided an alternative explanation and that a book on intelligent design was available in the library. That roundabout effort to undermine the teaching of evolution has been challenged as unconstitutional in the courts, with a verdict expected by early January.

Meanwhile, Kansas seems to be veering once again toward supernatural science. Six years ago, the Kansas State Board of Education gutted its statewide science standards to eliminate evolution as an explanation for the development of humanity, and tossed out the Big Bang theory of the origin of the universe as well. That madness was reversed the following year, when voters dumped three of the conservative board members responsible.

Now the current board has narrowly approved new science standards that leave evolution in place but add specific criticisms that schools are urged to teach. Most significant, the definition of science is changed so it is not limited to natural explanations.

The standards, which define the material to be covered in statewide science tests, won’t take effect until 2007 at the earliest. That leaves time for the electorate to once again dump the board members responsible for this lunacy.

* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Bad Behavior has blocked 1328 access attempts in the last 7 days.