"The genuine tragedy of Coyne's argument is the way in which it seeks to enlist science in a frankly ideological crusade—a campaign to purge science of religionists in the name of doctrinal purity. That campaign will surely fail, but in so doing it may divert those of us who cherish science from a far more urgent task, especially in America today."

And I believe the media contributes to this "ideological crusade" in failing to report scientific findings critically and objectively. One example is how the media often fails to distinguish between adult and embryonic stem cell research.

A related example is the now discredited stem cell/cloning research out of Korea several years back. I recall an editorial stating that the breakthroughs transcend the life issues, and declared opponents of embryonic stem cell research as being on the wrong side of the issue. The then trumpeted research turned out to be a humbug.

It makes me wonder if there will be a backlash against "science" in the future with the a skeptical public no longer supporting R&D funding in a number of areas. Such an outcome would be unfortunate, so thank you to Kenneth Miller for his passionate argument.
dpt | 01.30.09 - 12:28 pm | #

It must be tough for Kenneth Miller, caught between ID supporters and the Dawkins crowd. Of course, I suppose that's a bit like the position of Catholics in American politics and religion generally.
Alphonsus | 01.30.09 - 2:56 pm | #