Aspen
Neal Lane teaches physics at Rice University. He once directed the National Science Foundation. He served as President Clinton’s chief science adviser and president of Sigma Xi, the Scientific Research Society.
Lane, 67, has always believed in the power of scientific inquiry to improve individuals and societies.
So it is ironic that at this point, his most important conviction seems to be a leap of faith.
Lane is convinced that the American people will not stand for the current assault by religious fundamentalists on science. He is convinced, even though he thinks “that fundamentalist beliefs have much more influence now than at any time I can remember in my lifetime.”
What happens as religious beliefs replace science in determining public policies for such things as stem-cell research and the teaching of biology is “fundamentally dangerous,” Lane said.
As he prepared to lecture Tuesday at the Aspen Institute on threats to the future of science and technology, Lane predicted that eventually, Americans would not stand for religious fundamentalism posing as science.
Then, he went on to outline a gathering crisis that, unabated, is costing lives, as well as America’s status as a scientific and technological power.
At the root of the problem is religion trying to take over science.
The insistence that children be taught religious creationism in science classes along with evolution is a good example. Kansas is about to implement such a policy for its public schools.
“Children who are not taught science, who are taught biblical information as if it were science, suffer enormously,” Lane said. “We know that the whole foundation of biology is Darwinian evolution as it has been revised through the years based on scientific findings. It’s the whole foundation of basic biology, including medical research and all the treatments that cure people.
“It’s important for scientists to get that story out to parents. Evolution is very important to their children and their children’s children.”
All science is critical to endless generations. But decrees that rely on fundamentalist faith instead of scientific facts dominate many of today’s most important policy debates.
“I don’t see any evidence that the Scriptures were intended to be a scientific guidebook,” said Lane, who was raised a churchgoing Catholic and remains religious. “I don’t see Scripture as field guides for chemistry or biology or physics or atmospheric science.”
What Lane has seen are stem-cell research debates that attack science in the name of fundamentalist objections to abortion and many forms of contraception.
Abortion foes consider an egg fertilized by a sperm a human being. Scientists do not. It will boil down to a matter of public understanding and public trust, Lane said.
A lack of public investment in science, along with the export of research and development jobs and technological jobs, threatens America’s superpower status, too. But attacks on science by certain religious viewpoints must be addressed.
“The attacks on (science in) classrooms damage the education of children,” Lane said. “The attacks in Washington are hurting the health and welfare of the American people.”
The choice, he added, is not between religion and science, but in recognizing their separate, equally important roles.
Science concerns itself with what, he said. Religion deals with why.
Lane believes scientists have a role in helping the public make the distinction.
“We need to try to influence policy in an overt way,” Lane said. “We haven’t.
“If we get behind in an important area of science, particularly one that affects people’s health, that costs lives. It allows people to suffer debilitating illnesses and injuries unnecessarily.”
Neal Lane doesn’t think the American people will tolerate that.
Here’s hoping they reward his faith.
Jim Spencer’s column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. He can be reached at 303-820-1771 or jspencer@denverpost.com.
