hokieQuote:So wait... by "muzzle" science, what exactly do you mean? You want to prevent scientists from exploring our world?
His means of communication is to NOT communicate. I dont know where hes going on this. (Maybe It was tucked into one of his rants) Obviously hes not even mildly associated with science or hed recognize that its never been a matter of "should it be muzzled". It IS.
Muzzling of Science has been a fact ever since the Royal Academy. (Newton was famous for exerting negative influence against Hooker and others because it would possibly demean Newtons own work.
We laugh at Lysenko and how one scientist had transformed and set back Russian biolgy for a generation and we say , with amusement, "This could never happen here"-To those I say BULLSHIT, just look out of your cubicle
Anyone who works in Climatological research or Paleoclimatology is always in danger of losing funding should their work not support the underlying premises of the funding organization. FAir? Hell NO, but the nature of science is often to address the unpopular unknown reaches of our world, and should one be unfortunate enough to uncover evidence that supports not the "conventioanl wisdom" well, people can lose industrial and governmental support at the stroke of a pen.
Continental Drift was not "settled science" till the early 1980's. It was amazing how the "old School Uniformitarians" lobbied to keep evidence of mantle plumes and other data from the journals, mostly by editorial footdragging. It was a dark side of scientific territorialism. It wasnt until industry realized that more accurate predictions could be made by consideraing how continents move around. Then the entire theory became part of orthodox uniformitarian thought when it was finally discovered that it had gone on unchecked for eons.
"Muzzling science" in spendis realm is asked in a sense of naivete just like someone would come up to you and ask you "What do you think of" The Big Bang", even though you didnt understand that entire careers are based upon whether one is a Big BAnger or not(I personally am not but this is not a symposium)
"string Theory" has always been a BANDWAGON, one could make or lose a career in Cosmology and theoretical physics if one 's position on ST was not properly sensitized to the "Canon of the LAw".
Ever since pre-reformation days, when churches attempted to muzzle science have we lived with this reality. Today, however, its a matter of conflicting evidence that underpins more dark side political agendas rather than simple religious dogma.
This all has nothing in common with ID however. ID is a fact -free interpretation and mining of "loopholes" ofscience .Were back to the old=time religion muzzling by attempting to pose a phony apparent sense of egalite' or a moral imperative in scientific research. Dr Behe, while his collegues have distanced themselves from his positions, theyve actually suffered more for their reasonable positions than is BEHE.
Look at stem cell research or Ice core data that shows Global warming is a cyclic "Uniformitarian" event, In the case of the latter, youd better not try to show your resume to most state colleges that are largely endowed by non industrial means.
Muzzle science an option? Feh! dont get me going about it spendi. Im just counting the days to when the present administrations scientific "Hacks", are without careers in Their roles as "Science Advisors". Weve been living in the Planet of the Apes for as long as Ive been in the business of Applied Science.