LETTERS

摘要

The Policy forum "Framing science" by M. C. Nisbet and C. Mooney (6 APRIL, P. 56) argues that because different audiences respond differently to certain science-based public policy issues, scientists should trade their reliance on fact-based arguments for ones more slanted toward the interests of specific groups. Their examples—climate change, evolution, and stem cells—seem all too similar to the parable of the blind men and the elephant, each man describing the beast differently based on his own limited data. In the end, although each describes a portion of the elephant accurately, none can picture the entire animal. That seems more a model for politicians than scientists, and Nisbet and Mooney's advice that "scientists should strategically avoid emphasizing the technical details of science when trying to defend it" seems somewhat dishonest. I would hope that researchers continue to rely on their data, rather than on what "spin" on an issue might prove more convincing.