Changes

* Promote the responsible use of science in public policy;

* Promote the responsible use of science in public policy;

When findings which undermine its [[public policy]] platform are submitted to its journal, these findings are typically dismissed as being "of no interest". This directly contradicts of the key principles of [[science]], which is to give all theories and hypothesis a [[reality check]]. It is actually very much in the interest of science (as a body of knowledge) as well as the scientific profession itself, when contrary findings are made known to other scientists. Otherwise, misleading and false information can be promoted by the unscrupulous (hucksters, rabble rousers, and ideologues).

When findings which undermine its [[public policy]] platform are submitted to its journal, these findings are typically dismissed as being "of no interest". This directly contradicts of the key principles of [[science]], which is to give all theories and hypothesis a [[reality check]]. It is actually very much in the interest of science (as a body of knowledge) as well as the scientific profession itself, when contrary findings are made known to other scientists. Otherwise, misleading and false information can be promoted by the unscrupulous (hucksters, rabble-rousers, and ideologues).

 

==The anti-DDT campaign==

==The anti-DDT campaign==

Contrary to scientific facts, the AAAS condemned [[DDT]] as "environmentally unsafe". It based this assumption on a paper about birds and the alleged thinning of eggshells by DDT in their diet. In reality, the researcher had reduced [[calcium]] in the birds' diet while conducting the experiment, thereby falsifying the results. When this was exposed, and another study was performed showing that DDT consumption did '''not''' thin the birds' eggshells, the AAAS refused to publish the results in its journal ''Science''. Dr. Thomas Jukes of UC Berkeley reported a conversation in which the editor of ''Science'' had revealed his policy of never publishing anything positive about DDT. <ref>[http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache%3AEN7NHyE9TxwJ%3Awww.jpands.org%2Fvol9no3%2Fedwards.pdf+%22Scientific+fraud%22&hl=en&gl=us DDT: A Case Study in Scientific Fraud]</ref>

Contrary to scientific facts, the AAAS condemned [[DDT]] as "environmentally unsafe". It based this assumption on a paper about birds and the alleged thinning of eggshells by DDT in their diet. In reality, the researcher had reduced [[calcium]] in the birds' diet while conducting the experiment, thereby falsifying the results. When this was exposed, and another study was performed showing that DDT consumption did '''not''' thin the birds' eggshells, the AAAS refused to publish the results in its journal ''Science''. Dr. Thomas Jukes of UC Berkeley reported a conversation in which the editor of ''Science'' had revealed his policy of never publishing anything positive about DDT. <ref>[http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache%3AEN7NHyE9TxwJ%3Awww.jpands.org%2Fvol9no3%2Fedwards.pdf+%22Scientific+fraud%22&hl=en&gl=us DDT: A Case Study in Scientific Fraud]</ref>