Why don’t they talk about defamation of science?

While we’re discussing the ludicrous concept of “defamation of religion”, I’m wondering why no one talks about defamation of science. Maybe we could try to ban Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and all those other books, movies, TV shows, etc., that present stereotyped images of irresponsible, hubristic scientists.

...

Complete entry

Posted by bryce  on  04/05  at  10:46 AM

"we can see that the defamation of science goes on and on."

Their obvious response would likely be, "no, no, our criticism is not of science, but of /bad/ science."
We mustn't feel that there's no bad science out there (we've sadly all seen examples), so our job is to argue why this or that scientific teaching is solid, and not resort to charging our opponents with "defaming science."

Posted by Lanny  on  04/06  at  02:46 AM

Every time some creationist or ID-er suggests that the theory of evolution is wrong or is not supported by convincing evidence, it insults all scientists the scientists who have devoted their lives to investigating biology. In some cases, they gave their lives traveling to far off places in search of fossils or new specimens.

By suggesting that 99 percent of all biologists are either ignorant or duplicitous, it insults all scientists who are pledged to the value of letting the evidence shape the theory. The theory of evolution is integrally linked to all the other sciences and so an insult to evolutionary biologists is to imply that all scientists are mistaken about such fundamental findings as the age of the earth, continental drift, the physics of radiation, vacines, and star formation.

We should point this out whenever the anti-evolutionists insult science and scientists by the implications of their claims. They should answer for this and not be allowed to defame science, just as anyone would have to do if he/she defamed a religious tradition.

Posted by Faisal  on  04/13  at  07:16 AM

I want to ask that nowadays many a science jargon especially that from quantum mechanics is going around with, so-they-are-called, Newagers. Is it correct for the science to lend them her ideas, especially when they are not making much difference trying to be mystics?

---

Add your comment here:

Name:

Email:

Location:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below: