[decimon]

I'd guess that Brooks is wrong. A period of radical advance requires a following period of consolidation and incremental advance to provide the shoulders upon which the next Newton may stand.

What do you think?

[decimon]

Barbarian boffin ping.

[RoadTest]

This doesn’t even hint at the real problem, which is the politicization of science.

[ClearCase_guy]

A renaissance man, a top neurosurgeon, particle physicist, race car driver, rock star and comic book hero, and probably the last hope of the human race.

[subterfuge]

Science's importance was acknowledged but it was also mistrusted

One of the basic tenants of science...DON'T TRUST--VERIFY!

Why can't liberals understand that?

[Wuli]

The problem (in “trusting science”) is not in trusting SCIENCE, but in trusting the scientist, and the problem in trusting the scientist is that once the “supremacy of science” was socially accepted, the scientific community became an arrogant theocratic community.

[TheBigIf]

According to the left-wing these are all scientific facts:

1.) A person’s future sexual behavior and desires is hard-wired at birth.

2.) Homosexuality is natural and good.

3.) Mankind is killing the earth through attempts to live a better life and prosper. So are many other animals as well just by simply eating and releasing waste.

4.) Each of us has an ancestor that was an ape.

5.) A human being is not really a human being until after birth and so it is scientifically alright to kill them.

If this is what is meant by science being the new rock n roll then it certainly is not a good thing. All of the above is not science but left-wing BS.

There is also the aspect of our current scientific medical culture that gives medical excuses for more and more behavior and simply prescribes a drug telling people (AND CHILDREN) that they are not responsible for their own behavior. More left-wing BS.

All of this is not a good trend. It is time to put a stop to it and not celebrate it as the author suggests.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

This is Dr. Paul Ehrlich (14 March 1854 – 20 August 1915), a true scientist. He is in the pantheon of the greatest scientists who ever lived. The reason for this is not only that he came up with the first effective treatment for the then horrific disease syphilis, but he did it in the most scientific, objective, Germanic, methodical, and orderly way imaginable. A master of the scientific method.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Ehrlich

He was so highly respected that Germany put his face on their 200 DM banknote. A movie was made about him, starring Edward G. Robinson, entitled Dr. Ehrlich's Magic Bullet (1940), which is quite good.

He was so famous, that one of the greatest scientific frauds of the 20th Century, Dr. Paul R. Ehrlich, butterfly expert, public hysteric, and population explosion theorist, was named after him, to exploit the real Dr. Ehrlich's greatness. The two should never be confused.

[texanred]

I do think scientists are portrayed as the monks of our age. There are a lot of parallels so that much seems accurate. However, I think we do scientists a disservice by casting them as non-creative.

I've seen artists assume that scientists won't “get” their work - and scientists assuming that they won't as well! - because it's “creative”. I don't get it. I don't begin to have the mathematical imagination required to understand what a quantum physicist does. Of course they are creative and imaginative!

[onedoug]

I like science, especially physics and seismology. I like God and Torah too. They all work very well together for me.