- Email: [email protected]
Review: Copernicus' Secret by Jack Repcheck
Commentary
THEA BRINE
World lines Lawrence Krauss
Scientists, show your good side LAST month, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney gave his own version of John Kennedy’s famous 1960 speech, in which Kennedy reassured those who thought his Catholicism would turn him into a puppet of the Vatican by bravely declaring to an audience of Southern Baptist leaders, “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute”. In Romney’s rendition, however, America is a place where there is no room in the state for those who do not go to church. In the spirit of inclusiveness, Romney described an America made up of Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Jews and Muslims. He failed, though, to include one group that is probably larger than at least two of these: the non-religious. I have expressed my differences with Richard Dawkins in the pages of New Scientist, but nothing better supports the validity of his concerns about the public perception of atheism in the US than Romney’s speech: the notion that an individual whose actions are based on a belief in www.newscientist.com
God is a good person, while one whose actions are not rooted in religion is evil. Even scarier is the notion clearly prevalent in the current US political system that the more you pray, the better suited you are to govern. Romney urged judges to use the foundations of their faith in making decisions, and insisted
“Scientists need to play an active role in opposing faith-based governing” that religious faith remain a vibrant force in government. There are many among the faithful who argue that their faith helps inform their reason. I accept that as a reality. Ultimately, though, reason has to be the key basis of political decision-making, and whatever else comes into it, the most important factor informing reason should be empirical evidence. If Romney doesn’t scare you in this regard, consider Mike Huckabee. Without expending
Bookends significant funds, Huckabee has pulled ahead of his fellow Republican candidates in the important early primary state of South Carolina. When asked to identify the source of his newfound popularity, Huckabee suggested it might be the Lord’s doing, saying there was “no human explanation” for his recent surge in the polls. That’s not surprising coming from a man who thinks the Earth might be 6000 years old, but is it what we need in the leader of the free world? Romney argued in his speech that America’s founding fathers established the United States “under God”. In light of that claim, it is worth remembering Thomas Jefferson’s words: “I am satisfied, and sufficiently occupied with the things which are, without tormenting or troubling myself about those which may indeed be, but of which I have no evidence.” Jefferson and others established a precedent for reality-based governance, which, in these times, we so desperately need. These issues are worth raising in a science magazine because scientists, regardless of their religious leanings, need to play an active role in opposing faithbased governing. Scientists have done a particularly poor job of explaining that basing decisions on empirical evidence does not make one immoral. Many of the current attacks on science in the US are predicated on the notion that because science does not include God in its picture of the universe, science is inherently evil. Science, however, has an ethical basis in honesty, open-mindedness tempered by healthy scepticism, full disclosure and anti-authoritarianism. The scientific method makes it possible for empirical reasoning to provide a basis for an ethical, and even moral world. If scientists are shy to point that out, then we encourage the at best exclusionary and at worst delusional attitudes espoused by Romney and Huckabee in the public square. ●
Botanical rainbow Nature’s Palette: The science of plant color by David Lee, University of Chicago Press, $35/£19, ISBN 9780226470528 Reviewed by Adrian Barnett
ROSES are red, violets are blue, and you can almost see right through a piece of sea lettuce. David Lee’s book is for anyone who has ever wanted to go beyond “that’s nice” to find out how and why plants are so colourful. Crammed with facts and fine photographs, it illustrates how plant colours are formed, listing their diverse uses as well as the complex and elegant chemistry of their manufacture. Lee takes care to pay tribute to the remarkable dedication and insight of researchers. A great book that will leave you looking at leaves and petals with renewed admiration.
Heroic journey Copernicus’ Secret by Jack Repcheck, Simon & Schuster, $25, ISBN 9780743289511 Reviewed by Sam Kean
IF THERE was one thing Nicolaus Copernicus feared more than the Catholic Church it was astronomers pouring scorn on his theory of heliocentricity. So much so that he delayed publishing On the Revolutions, and almost died with the book unfinished. Repcheck tells the incredible tale of Georg Rheticus, who made the arduous trip from Lutheran Germany into Catholic Poland to convince Copernicus to release his magnum opus. The tale drives the book, and great narrative scenes, including his betrayal of Rheticus, make Copernicus seem fully human.
5 January 2008 | NewScientist | 45
THEA BRINE
World lines Lawrence Krauss
Scientists, show your good side LAST month, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney gave his own version of John Kennedy’s famous 1960 speech, in which Kennedy reassured those who thought his Catholicism would turn him into a puppet of the Vatican by bravely declaring to an audience of Southern Baptist leaders, “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute”. In Romney’s rendition, however, America is a place where there is no room in the state for those who do not go to church. In the spirit of inclusiveness, Romney described an America made up of Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Jews and Muslims. He failed, though, to include one group that is probably larger than at least two of these: the non-religious. I have expressed my differences with Richard Dawkins in the pages of New Scientist, but nothing better supports the validity of his concerns about the public perception of atheism in the US than Romney’s speech: the notion that an individual whose actions are based on a belief in www.newscientist.com
God is a good person, while one whose actions are not rooted in religion is evil. Even scarier is the notion clearly prevalent in the current US political system that the more you pray, the better suited you are to govern. Romney urged judges to use the foundations of their faith in making decisions, and insisted
“Scientists need to play an active role in opposing faith-based governing” that religious faith remain a vibrant force in government. There are many among the faithful who argue that their faith helps inform their reason. I accept that as a reality. Ultimately, though, reason has to be the key basis of political decision-making, and whatever else comes into it, the most important factor informing reason should be empirical evidence. If Romney doesn’t scare you in this regard, consider Mike Huckabee. Without expending
Bookends significant funds, Huckabee has pulled ahead of his fellow Republican candidates in the important early primary state of South Carolina. When asked to identify the source of his newfound popularity, Huckabee suggested it might be the Lord’s doing, saying there was “no human explanation” for his recent surge in the polls. That’s not surprising coming from a man who thinks the Earth might be 6000 years old, but is it what we need in the leader of the free world? Romney argued in his speech that America’s founding fathers established the United States “under God”. In light of that claim, it is worth remembering Thomas Jefferson’s words: “I am satisfied, and sufficiently occupied with the things which are, without tormenting or troubling myself about those which may indeed be, but of which I have no evidence.” Jefferson and others established a precedent for reality-based governance, which, in these times, we so desperately need. These issues are worth raising in a science magazine because scientists, regardless of their religious leanings, need to play an active role in opposing faithbased governing. Scientists have done a particularly poor job of explaining that basing decisions on empirical evidence does not make one immoral. Many of the current attacks on science in the US are predicated on the notion that because science does not include God in its picture of the universe, science is inherently evil. Science, however, has an ethical basis in honesty, open-mindedness tempered by healthy scepticism, full disclosure and anti-authoritarianism. The scientific method makes it possible for empirical reasoning to provide a basis for an ethical, and even moral world. If scientists are shy to point that out, then we encourage the at best exclusionary and at worst delusional attitudes espoused by Romney and Huckabee in the public square. ●
Botanical rainbow Nature’s Palette: The science of plant color by David Lee, University of Chicago Press, $35/£19, ISBN 9780226470528 Reviewed by Adrian Barnett
ROSES are red, violets are blue, and you can almost see right through a piece of sea lettuce. David Lee’s book is for anyone who has ever wanted to go beyond “that’s nice” to find out how and why plants are so colourful. Crammed with facts and fine photographs, it illustrates how plant colours are formed, listing their diverse uses as well as the complex and elegant chemistry of their manufacture. Lee takes care to pay tribute to the remarkable dedication and insight of researchers. A great book that will leave you looking at leaves and petals with renewed admiration.
Heroic journey Copernicus’ Secret by Jack Repcheck, Simon & Schuster, $25, ISBN 9780743289511 Reviewed by Sam Kean
IF THERE was one thing Nicolaus Copernicus feared more than the Catholic Church it was astronomers pouring scorn on his theory of heliocentricity. So much so that he delayed publishing On the Revolutions, and almost died with the book unfinished. Repcheck tells the incredible tale of Georg Rheticus, who made the arduous trip from Lutheran Germany into Catholic Poland to convince Copernicus to release his magnum opus. The tale drives the book, and great narrative scenes, including his betrayal of Rheticus, make Copernicus seem fully human.
5 January 2008 | NewScientist | 45