Putting the Cart Before the Horse

Or, perhaps more precisely, putting the rocket propelled space telescope before the Asiatic wild ass.  

I'm referring, with this oblique equine aphorism, to the recent launch of NASA's Kepler Mission, which will use the Kepler space telescope to search for Earth-like extra-solar planets.  By training itself on our closest neighboring stars, and recording the infinitesimal dimmings that result when a planet passes between the star and scope,  Kepler will be able, over the course of three or four years, to determine which solar systems harbor planets similar to our own.  And, theoretically, such planets could harbor life.  Alien life.  For real.

Statistically speaking, life on other planets is basically assured.  The galaxy is a vast place, the universe almost infinitely more so, and with every new discovery, the concept of Earth's particular life sustaining uniqueness is swiftly eroding.  There has already been evidence of liquid water and (just maybe) fossilized microbial life on Mars, and that's a veritable stone's throw away.  The potential for life in other star systems has moved from the realm of science fiction to that of science fact with remarkable swiftness, and skepticism amongst the scientific community is readily turning to excitement at the prospect.  While the search for alien life is still very much in the first stages of its infancy, the Kepler Mission is one of the first clear and intentional steps in that exploration.  

But I'm afraid it's all just an enormous waste of money.  Well, not a waste per se, just rather a gross misuse.  I do honestly believe in the importance of space exploration and research; it's simply where the trajectory of human evolution and development is headed.  And, quite frankly, I'm excited at the prospect of what we may find.  One day locating alien life would explode the preconceptions of our entire species, and change our outlook on our own lives and our role in the universe.  But for now, shouldn't we concern ourselves a little more with life here on earth? 

Wilderness is disappearing, the climate is heating up, the ice caps are melting, species are vanishing, and entire ecosystems, hell, the health of the entire planet, is slowly but surely circling the drain.  That's not doomsaying, that's fact, and if anything, I'm putting it lightly.  In such a situation, how can we possibly justify an expenditure on something as ephemeral as extra-solar photography?  I can't help feeling like this mission is being undertaken for no other reason than to slake the curiosity of a bunch of astrophysicists.  And while the $600+ million price tag for the mission may seem like a drop in the bucket, given the state of the economy, think of how much land could be permanently preserved in trust with that kind of money.  With $600 million we might be able to save the Javan rhinoceros, or conserve sections of Brazil's Atlantic forest, or even just get that much closer to developing clean energy sources.  With so many problems at hand, how can we still justify gazing off at the heavens?

I'm conflicted, certainly.  I support our funding of the sciences, and I support scientific pursuit in general, but even I have my limits.  I want to be excited for the prospects of Kepler's research (though I admit I couldn't understand a lick of the raw data if I tried), and I want to be able look up at the sky with the same interest and intent as the scientists at NASA.  But instead, I can't help but look around at the glory and diversity of life on this planet, and wonder just how much longer that will be the case. 

One Step Forward, One Step Back

Today, President Obama took a significant step towards rectifying the sins of the Bush administration's science policy, by reversing a blanket ban on embryonic stem cell research.  Stem cell research has long been at the forefront of the battle between faith and science, and the Bush presidency's stance on the subject was perfectly emblematic of it's response to scientific progress in general: 'not on our watch'.  Any aspect of scientific research that either cut against policy or offended the fundamentalist christian right was denounced or denied.  Climate data was suppressed, environmental mandates were ignored, and across the spectrum, information was massaged and mangled until it supported political decisions which had no true basis in scientific fact.  It was a very bleak eight years, a veritable dark age of the American scientific spirit.  And now, supposedly, a new day has dawned.

The importance of the stem cell reversal should not be underplayed; it is an enormous move in the right direction, at least in one particular field, and possibly for the scientific community overall.  The argument against embryonic stem cell research is reactionary and  superstitious at best, and because of our government's willingness to cave into fundamentalism, the true and daily suffering of individuals was prolonged unnecessarily.  We're effectively eight years behind where we should be as a logical and rational nation, and we must not forget that this course of action has been physically and mentally detrimental to many of our citizens.  Stem cell science isn't a magical fix of course, but the regenerative potential of the cells is also difficult to overestimate.  Who can say what we'd be capable of today, had Bush not chosen the cowardly and illogical route?   

By officially reversing course today, Obama is beginning to fulfill what, to me at least, was the most interesting and important promise of his inaugural speech, the returning of science to its proper stature within the American government.  That single line spoke directly to those of us dissatisfied, outraged really, by years of willful ignorance by both a government and its people.  It let us know that a veritable renaissance was at hand, not just for those who practice the sciences, but also for those, such as my self, who simply appreciate the continual cause of human enlightenment.  Today's executive order goes some distance towards reassuring me that Obama was serious in his commitment.  And yet, at the same time, I'm given pause by other actions of the administration.

In almost the same breath as the stem cell decision, Obama's Secretary of the Interior struck a blow against the environment by upholding a Bush-era policy of de-listing the gray wolf from the ESA in the norther Rockies.  The secretary in question is Ken Salazar, former senator from Colorado, and the de-listing of the wolf places 'management' of the animals in the hands of state agencies rather than under federal oversight.  Such management will amount to little more than controlled extirpation, as cattlemen and ranchers are given free reign to scour the predators off the land.  It's a markedly non-scientific approach, one dictated by fear, hatred, and greed, and has no basis in good environmental policy.  The success of the Endangered Species Act for the gray wolf, years of protection and repatriation, has been undone with a pen stroke.  If what has occurred in Wyoming is and indication, what is to come is wholesale slaughter.  

Ken Salazar's choice to enact left-over Bush policy is indicative of his entire environmental outlook.  Though a democrat, Salazar comes from a frontier-minded, ranching background, and has long been a proponent of extraction based industries in the American west.  His cabinet appointment by President Obama gave many ecologists and environmentalists cause to doubt Obama's true commitment to reform, and the recent wolf decision shows that such fears were justified.  The disappointment of the Obama administration is its moderation.  It's not a surprise, exactly; politics dirties the cleanest of intentions.  But it is discouraging.  It's a sign that even in the most open and rational of recent times, every step in the right direction comes at a cost.   

Happy Birthday Chuck!

Today marks an auspicious date: the bicentennial birthdays of both Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin.  It's no surprise, really, who gets the attention here in America and who get's short shrift; Honest Abe has been the belle of the ball lately (even Bush tried to invoke him in the waning days of his term), and poor Charley, well, let's just say some folk don't kindly take to his thinkin.  It's a shame, honestly.  Not that Lincoln is garnering so much attention, but that Darwin is garnering so little.  While, admittedly, there's no grounds for it, if the two men were to be held up in direct comparison, Darwin's star should far eclipse Lincoln's.  Though Lincoln's impact on the course of American history is difficult to diminish, what, at the end of the day, did he really contribute to the greater cause of humanity?  He begrudgingly ended the institution of slavery in the US, but this was effectively playing catch up with the rest of the civilized world.  And, he couldn't do so without plunging the nation into it's bloodiest and darkest period.  While that says more about the nation than the man, it doesn't exactly take take the stink off. Ultimately, Lincoln was a skillful orator with enough bravery to tear the band-aid off.  He was a good man, maybe a great man, but when push comes to shove, he was merely a footnote in the greater scheme of history.

What, then of Darwin?  If anything, the man was a less impressive specimen of an individual, portly, balding, wracked with anxiety, exuding about as much raw charisma as the barnacles he so dearly loved.  But beneath that beetling, neanderthal brow, true genius percolated, the informal, unpretentious genius than drew wisdom from the world at hand.  What we today call the theory of evolution in shorthand was the brainchild of a humble country naturalist, and perhaps no other scientific principle is as important or as influential.  There's a well worn quote by Theodosius Dobzahnsky that goes: "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution".  It's very true; without the guiding principle of evolution by natural selection to shine a light on the intricate workings of life, one would be forced to resort to ridiculous and preposterous make-believe explanations, like suggesting the world was 'designed' by some 'intelligent' 'god-like' individual.  Oh, wait...

Of all the slew of unaccounted for flaws that embarrasses me about being an American, none rankles me so much personally as our good, old-fashioned, religious-fueled ignorance.  I spent about two hours today casually perusing a high school biology textbook (the glorious life of a substitute teacher) and was struck by how much sense everything made, how much exquisite, well-formed sense the whole biological process made.  I'd hate to think that the entire, delicate system of life as we know it could be negated with one well placed sentence ascribing credit to some divine designer.  It's disgusting.  It's the antithesis of intelligence, but it's the goal of innumerable individuals across the country, eager to insert their religious beliefs into the body of scientific education, at a time when our nation already trails the rest of the industrial world academically.  We should all be embarrassed, not just me.  

So as I kick off this week of evolutionarily themed posts, I bid you to take a moment and, after giving Abe his proper congrats, give Darwin a little much needed love too.