This week's edition of The New Yorker (cover dated August 22) is unusually good. Among the features are a fascinating profile of Billy Graham, another of Kinky Friedman, and a thoughtful piece on the state of French politics and culture at this time. In the "Talk of the Town" section Hendrik Hertzberg skillfully skewers the Administration's anti-science bent in the context of the current hullabaloo over "intelligent design" and the President's recently articulated (ok, not the best word to describe the man's utterances) poisition that the theory ("creationism" in new packaging) should be taught alongside evolution, as if the two approaches had equal scientific merit. Here is an excerpt:
I.D.—whose central (and easily refuted) talking point is that certain structures of living things are too intricate to have evolved without the intervention of an “intelligent designer” (and You know who You are)—enjoys virtually no scientific support. It is not even a theory, in the scientific sense, because it is untestable and unsupportable by empirical evidence. It is a last-ditch skirmish in a misguided war against reason that cannot be won and, for religion's sake as well as science's, should not be fought. If the President's musings on it were an isolated crotchet, they would hardly be worth noting, let alone getting exercised about. But they're not. They reflect an attitude toward science that has infected every corner of his Administration. From the beginning, the Bush White House has treated science as a nuisance and scientists as an interest group—one that, because it lies outside the governing conservative coalition, need not be indulged. That's why the White House-sometimes in the service of political Christianism or ideological fetishism, more often in obeisance to baser interests like the petroleum, pharmaceutical, and defense industries-has altered, suppressed, or overriden scientific findings on global warming; missile defense; H.I.V./ AIDS; pollution from industrial farming and oil drilling; forest management and endangered species; environmental health, including lead and mercury poisoning in children and safety standards for drinking water; and non-abstinence methods of birth control and sexually-transmitted-disease prevention. It has grossly misled the public on the number of stem-cell lines available for research. It has appointed unqualified ideologues to scientific advisory committees and has forced out scientists who persist in pointing out inconvenient facts.
For the entire piece, click here.
