Judging Science Intelligently

The Science & Technology Insights article "Judging Science" did not note that there are quite a few scientists, who, although they have no problem with plate tectonics or the age of the universe, find it hard to believe that the universe made itself without any power or intelligence to cause it (C&EN, Nov. 27, 2006, page 32).

Clinton Denson
Louisville, Ohio

The most disturbing thing about "Judging Science" is the disclaimer at the end. It is time for the American Chemical Society to show the same courage and wisdom as Judge John E. Jones III and the Geological Society of America in renouncing intelligent design for the farce that it is.

Curtis Schilling
Marietta, Ohio

"Judging Science" was both timely and very relevant to our field of chemistry. The denial of scientific findings based on religious grounds has a long and embarrassing history, including recent examples like creationism and denial of the moon landing, as well as ancient examples like the persecution of Galileo.

Creationism hurts us all, attacking chemistry, physics, geology, biology, genetics, and especially general science education. Perhaps its biggest victim is Christianity itself, which is made to look at best naive and often dishonest by the deception that creationists must use to support their position.

American science education can't afford the outbreaks of creationism we have today if we expect to compete in a global future where an accurate knowledge of science is essential. Editorials like this help keep us informed of important threats to U.S. leadership in science and are in many ways the most important articles in C&EN.

Jon Host
Midland, Mich.