HOLY CRAP! It seems I really DO get mail from Michael Fumento...

Hmmm...I wonder what would happen if I keep mentioning Mel Gibson?

Anyway, it started here. And then digressed to this point.

And now, in reply, I received the following missive.


fumento said:

It wasn't "people" pretending to be me; it was me. You're wrong for one very simple reason: There is no such thing as "the scientific community." There's no community, just a bunch of scientists with vastly different views on almost every area of science you can mention. If you read some of my stem cell pieces you'd find lots of quotes from lots of scientists saying ESCs are not needed. How does that fit into your community? Moreover, some are religiously opposed to the use of ESCs, such as David Hess. Again -- poof! -- no community.


Wow. Being taken seriously is a serious burden for Your Humble Servant, kiddies. Let's see how I handled it in my reply.

I apologize for the skepticism, but that is the price one pays here in Bloggerdom. If you could read the kind of e-mail I get, you'd wonder why a real author with a real reputation would notice my idiot blog. At least you don't send me five thousand word screed proving the Catholic Church is the antichrist, and for that I thank you. The intelligent conversation you provide me is pure gravy.

For what it is worth, I thought "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS" was an excellent book.

But...

Is there really no such thing as a scientific community? Are there no shared goals, no common interests, no similar likes and dislikes among people of similar social and educational backgrounds? Do not scientists congregate together and join scientific organizations? You are straining the bounds of credulity.

I am not, after all, claiming scientists are a monolithic leftist mob like the news media, where 90% vote one way and one way only. Such a thing isn't necessary to nudge laymen's beliefs in the desired direction.

All one needs is a few dedicated ideologues willing to
bully the community into line. If Lenin and a handful of Bolsheviks can succeed beyond anyone's expectations, is it really surprising the American Psychological Association can declare homosexuality suddenly nonexistent with nary a peep of protest to be heard?

Again, the question is not the relative numbers of real
scientists and those who use science merely to advance their political agendas. The question is will those with the most to lose from the corruption of science do enough restore its reputation?

Regardless of whether I have any clue or not, don't you
think science and scientists would be better off if they did behave as if they were part of a community, looking out for one another, policing the bad guys, and keeping the place tidy, helpful, and friendly to any non-scientists who may
happen by?