The Science Establishment Strikes Back

I still read the dead-tree version of some magazines. I like to have to page through a variety of things and consciously make the decision not to read stuff that I frequently wind up reading anyway.

Scientific American is one of those dead-tree favorites. This month, they have a couple of quotes in a series they call "Suspect Science." One is Michelle Bachmann's concern trolling about the papillomavirus vaccine and the other is Rick Perry's quote about evolution being "a scientific theory that's not settled yet."

Both are identified as Republican candidates for the presidential nomination.

Chemical and Engineering News, the newsmagazine of the American Chemical Society, has an article titled "Alleged Science Manipulation" in its October 24 issue. Right in the first paragraph:

Some Republicans in the House of Representatives are now saying that EPA may be manipulating scientific assessments of the hazards of chemicals to sway pollution regulations.

The article is pretty much straight reporting, but it makes clear that the hearing being reported on is based on Republican concerns.

I don't recall seeing such explicit identification of party in these publications with reference to scientific issues before. Both have editorial columns that strongly support science-based issues like evolution and anthropogenic global warming; Scientific American's letters column is small and tends toward scientific issues. The letters column in C&E News allows longer and more letters which frequently take issue with AGW in particular.

It will be interesting to see the reactions. Probably some at their websites; I'll report if I check them out.