Serving the Community?

Over the last decade I have attempted to engage scientists as a means of further exploring issues that are in the public domain. I was astounded at the response that I receive.

A number of these scientists failed to respond in any shape or form even though my e-mail program indicated that my e-mail had been read.

With the few exceptions that I encountered I found that some scientists would respond if the material was one with which they had been associated and they would respond to the extent of attempting to provide clarity in relation to the material as presented. However as soon as you asked questions about the methodology and the process of the funding which underpins the material provided, they to would likewise simply cease communications.

It was not the refusal to engage that I found disappointing it was the refusal to explain the reasons for their failure to engage or to cease the engagement. Was it a case of ‘national security’ which seems to be the tag you hang on anything you don't want to share with the community or was it that they just won't talk to dumb arses, as they may have perceived me to be.

What I found was even more remarkable that was that about six months ago Brian Adams had a guest on his ABC radio Life Matters show, a scientist from England talking about the experience of some scientists who had dared to venture an opinion albeit based on their use of the scientific process in relation to issues in the public domain and end for their contribution were faced with intimidation and personal threats as a consequence, so I took the opportunity of e-mailing this particular individual enquiring as to whether or not he might like to make a contribution to this website only to be met with the non-response outcome I had experienced with many other scientists

Another very interesting example is from the Melbourne University which offers the facility of providing a website section specially dedicated to scientifically trained individuals that hold formal high-level tertiary qualifications in their particular field of study as being a resource group for the community in particular I would imagine people responsible for developing publications for public consumption.

However, I was amazed that when I approached several of these individuals I was again met with a wall of silence and not just on the initial response but also after exercising the option of reiterating my request by e-mail and then following that up by leaving a voice message on their phone system.

From my experiences over the last decade I have come to the conclusion that while undoubtedly scientists that hold formal tertiary qualifications, collectively possess high levels of intelligent. but they appear to possess, almost  universally (or perhaps even just universally) based on my experience, a low levels of courage.

It's must obviously be the case that the DNA gene for intellect and the gene for courage do not reside in close proximity if at all, on that particular DNA molecule.

I am not suggesting for one moment that confronting ignorance in a population with restricted intelligence is not an activity fought with risk but who was it, in history, that made the claim - ‘To those whom much is given, much is expected.’

There will be a price to be paid for challenging misinformation, propagated by powerful forces or shining a light in the darkness but why is it that whistleblowing is rarely ever demonstrated by high-profile tertiary qualified scientists holding prominent positions within our powerful institutions.

AND I also understand the argument that it is not the responsibility of this group of our society to be engaged in the social atmosphere of the community in which they work, it is simply their responsibility to ply the process of science on the voyage of discovery, towards truth, as we currently know it to be, just that I, for one, do not accept the basis of that argument.

Scientists as a group holds enormous power, the power of knowledge. To resile from actively promoting that knowledge is to abdicate one's responsibility as a member of the social species.

This group of our society (Scientist) could not have picked a worse time to adopt the ‘Wall of Silence”.

Now more than ever, as our society is experiencing an explosion of information, never before precedented in the annals of human evolution; and now with a ginormous capacity for highly effective generation of propaganda on a massive scale, these privileged class of individuals have retreated, inside their caves or more correctly into their ivory towers, placed their hands squarely behind their backs - while Rome burns.