Balanced Views or Self-Censorship?

It is most disturbing to read the letter by Brian Nordstrom (The Scientist, January 12, 1987, p. 10). He feels his intelligence has been insulted by your treatment of the evolution versus creationism question, and considers your arguments to be one-sided. He apparently thinks he can balance his education by canceling his subscription. That's a bit like the recent case in which parents demanded that their children not read certain books in school, insisting all the while that they only sought to

By | February 23, 1987

It is most disturbing to read the letter by Brian Nordstrom (The Scientist, January 12, 1987, p. 10). He feels his intelligence has been insulted by your treatment of the evolution versus creationism question, and considers your arguments to be one-sided. He apparently thinks he can balance his education by canceling his subscription.

That's a bit like the recent case in which parents demanded that their children not read certain books in school, insisting all the while that they only sought to balance their education between secular and sacred considerations. If Mr. Nordstrom thinks that a balance of arguments should be presented, then he should search out the creationists and read their wildest claims in addition to the opinions of scientists.

I'm sure that a diligent search of the popular press will turn up "balanced" articles, written with the intent of entertaining the average reader without offending or enlightening anyone. But to eliminate a scientific viewpoint from one's reading because it fails to support creationism is not an attempt to balance the arguments fairly, but blind self-censorship.

—Ann F. Kah
The Glidden Co.
Dwight P. Joyce Research Center
16651 Sprague Rd.,
Strongsville, OH 44136

Popular Now

  1. Secret Eugenics Conference Uncovered at University College London
  2. How Do Infant Immune Systems Learn to Tolerate Gut Bacteria?
  3. That Other CRISPR Patent Dispute
    Daily News That Other CRISPR Patent Dispute

    The Broad Institute and Rockefeller University disagree over which scientists should be named as inventors on certain patents involving the gene-editing technology.

  4. DOE-Sponsored Oak Ridge National Laboratory to Cut 100 More Jobs
AAAS