But the wondrous quality of what most of us share as scientists is that while we may be selectively attracted to one set of conjectures vs. another by how we think or might want the world to be, eventually those give way to new theories, and finally evidence--or the lack of it--manifests itself in our willingness to acknowledge ignorance. When such ignorance persists despite our best efforts, many of us accept the relevance of ethics, law, economics, or politics for adjudication or, more commonly, compromise.
I do remember Kantrowitz's early efforts to propose a science court and thought them interesting, novel, and worth trying. A few years ago, I got my chance to participate in one organized by the Federation of American Scientists to help inform the World Bank about a policy related to global warming. I came away much discouraged by the experience. The litigious, adversarial nature of the ...
