Nexus - 0904 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

appeared in Physics Today (no. 12, 1990). This brought on a As we saw with the case of science journalist Richard Milton, firestorm of controversy that had more to do with the "taboo" the science establishment plays hardball. Not only was Pusztai nature of Jahn's work than with any discussion of the validity of fired, but his reputation was tarnished when the press reported his methods. Another Nobel Prize winner, Steve Weinberg, that "his conclusions and the research were later said to be weighed in during an interview on the Heretics program. unfounded". The beleaguered scientist closed his side of a case Weinberg seemed more concerned with the impact Jahn's experi- that was prosecuted entirely in the court of public media ments would have on the accepted theories of physics than with — disclosure, arguing: any facts that the PK research had turned up, and the subject alone I am not against genetic engineering; I only ask for proper was enough to condemn the work in Weinberg's estimation. tests to be carried out before and not after GM food is This fiasco earned Jahn, a respected scientist holding down a released. prestigious post at a leading American university, the badge of (Guardian Weekly, February 12, 1999) "heretic". We saw a similar knee-jerk reaction when dissidents brought the hallowed "theory of evo- Whistleblowing is often the only lution" under close scrutiny. The public has to start becoming more aware that scientists are human beings with egos and self-interest at way the public is ever informed of wrongdoing in the field of science. It is clearly the right thing to do; however, it can lead to many person- staketwo realities that can and (fo Whistleblowing is often the a nals r loss of friends and rejec- "pure" science. This can produce an only way the public is cver History is full of examples of sci- aogont aioe in cents oho | informed of wrongdoing inf atts ant independent rsh and what is true by virtue of the fact the field of science. ridiculed, threatened and called that they are scientists, and because of that status they would never deviate from practising good science. The logic is obviously circular and is also educated, licensed medical doctor found among church ministers when it who became fascinated with the comes to morality. Our scientists often act like ministers of information he found in ancient myths that seemed to agree there every name in the book for delving into or proposing radical new ideas. Immanuel Velikovsky was a well- objective reality. had once been a great catastrophe that had a devastating impact on early civilisations. He had a hard time finding a publisher for WHISTLEBLOWERS AND RENEGADES his first book, Worlds in Collision. When Macmillan finally In 1999, Arpad Pusztai was fired from the Rowett Institute in decided to publish it, outraged scholars and scientists contacted Aberdeen, Scotland, for calling public attention to the conclusions the publisher, demanding that the book be dropped immediately. of a research report critical of genetically modified food, which | Macmillan caved in and transferred it to Doubleday because the the government had quietly quashed. Pusztai had previously been — aggrieved parties were the very people who bought their text- suspended over his research findings that showed rats fed GM books. This happened in 1950 and it was a sign of things to potatoes had suffered immune system damage. That was not the come, for it would not be the last time that scientists sought to ban conclusion that the British government was then looking for. His a book. "incorrect" science and honesty cost him his job on the project. Velikovsky's theory was a source of bitter contention in acade- mic circles for decades, until—lo and behold!—Alvarez announced in the 1980s that an asteroid had killed off most life on the planet 65 million years ago. (And that announcement, too, was steeped in contro- ) versy, as we will learn.) Today the asteroid $ r theory is widely accepted, although still y, debated. . But not all independent scientists are the a focal point of scorn and derision; some are vw a simply labelled "mavericks" and their work | Te is either ignored or regarded with the same a THE . suspicious furrowed brows as a noted Aya Ro aK crank's would be. However, a few of these ~Y rs individuals simply cannot be shoved into wn obscurity because their unconventional the- kins CB ories have been proven correct. { ( eeS The late Scotty MacNeish was a renegade A 2) archaeologist who always marched to the 2 AM ta — beat of his own drum. His career spanned six decades and most of it was steeped in —— oe controversy and heated debate. MacNeish Somarnlle is known for tracking down the origin of As we saw with the case of science journalist Richard Milton, the science establishment plays hardball. Not only was Pusztai fired, but his reputation was tarnished when the press reported that "his conclusions and the research were later said to be unfounded". The beleaguered scientist closed his side of a case that was prosecuted entirely in the court of public media disclosure, arguing: I am not against genetic engineering; I only ask for proper tests to be carried out before and not after GM food is released. Whistleblowing is often the only way the public is ever informed of wrongdoing in the field of science. WHISTLEBLOWERS AND RENEGADES In 1999, Arpad Pusztai was fired from the Rowett Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland, for calling public attention to the conclusions of a research report critical of genetically modified food, which the government had quietly quashed. Pusztai had previously been suspended over his research findings that showed rats fed GM potatoes had suffered immune system damage. That was not the conclusion that the British government was then looking for. His "incorrect" science and honesty cost him his job on the project. me i HO ( ‘4 ( Tanna K HES Serene ) 44 ¢ NEXUS JUNE — JULY 2002 (Guardian Weekly, February 12, 1999) www.nexusmagazine.com