Some of you might recall an earlier posting where I criticize Matt Nisbet for the way he organized a panel at the AAAS meeting without allowing anyone to give the other side of the issue [AAAS Panel: Communicating Science in a Religious America].I sent an email message to Professor Goldston, the panel moderator. Here's part of what I said.
I don't object to Nisbet presenting his point of view at a AAAS meeting but my respect for AAAS and your panel would be greatly diminished if the other side did not get a chance to make its case. Surely you do not want to give the impression that AAAS will only support scientists who agree with Nisbet? Surely you do not want to have a panel where the so-called "New Atheist" perspective is excluded and only religious scientists, or their close allies, are allowed to speak? Is that fair?Mike Dunford has followed up with a posting from several days ago [Yeah, could have seen that one coming].
Please make sure that you have appropriate balance on your panel. Please make sure you don't give the impression that AAAS endorses Nisbet and his ideas about framing. The other side needs to be heard.
It's about time we realized that Matt Nisbet is not a friend of science. He needs to be strongly opposed before he succeeds in fooling any more naive scientists who might fall for his silly nonsense.
This "framing" thing has gone too far.