I was asked by AAAS for my opinion.

So, I was asked today (April 10, 2023) by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, AAAS, for my opinion. I doubt they will publish it. So, here it is; 

My mother frequently admonished me to "Play nice with the other children."

AAAS should not. 

Science is not playing games. Our environment, and civilization are at threat of failure. This is not a game. There are political organizations actively denying basic science. AAAS must oppose them. 

The March 30 Science editorial "Fix the backlash against public health" is an example of failure by AAAS. In that editorial there is no mention of the politicization of Covid-19 from the first reported case in the USA. The "backlash" is political. The response must be political. Now contrast that with the excellent editorial March 31 in JAMA, "The Supreme Court Is Harming Public Health and the Environment." 

In 1981 I listened to 3 days of talks about "Climate Change" at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting. Scientists didn't then think that anybody would be so damn stupid as to ignore the problem. 

We were wrong. 

Some reading;

Oreskes, Naomi, Erik M. Conway 2010 "Merchants of Doubt" Bloomsbury Press. 

Michaels, David 2019 "The Triumph of Doubt: Dark Money and the Science of Deception" Oxford University. 

Mooney, Chris 2005 "The Republican War on Science" New York: Basic Press. 

Oreskes, and Conway document that the "American Tobacco Institute" was a fraud from the start with bogus "studies" that "proved" nicotine was not addictive, and did not cause cancer. The fossil fuel industry used the American Petroleum Institute on the same scheme (even some of the same "experts"). That gang originally set out to prove there was no medical threat from leaded gasoline, or smog. It was in the late 1970s and early '80s that climate change was added to the list of disasters that burning coal and petroleum "didn't cause." 

 David Michaels has focused more on the "what did they know, and when did they know it" aspects of climate destruction. His professional experience as an MD epidemiologist, and a Federal official are very important. Finally, as Chris Mooney showed 18 years ago, Republican politicians are just cheaper to buy.

For anyone unaware of the threat creationism is to science and civilization, I recommend reading; Scott, Eugenie C., 2005 Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction University of California Press 

Numbers, Ronald L. 2006 "The Creationists: The Evolution of Scientific Creationism" Berkeley: University of California Press 

Barbara Carroll Forrest, Paul R. Gross 2004 "Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design" Oxford University Press 

Matt Young, Taner Edis (Contributing Editors), 2004 "Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism" Rutgers University Press (My contribution, Chapter 8 "The explanatory filter, Archaeology, and Forensics" was used in the 2005 Dover Intelligent Design federal trial). 

Here is a single quote from a Christian creationist I found to summarize their entire issue, "I was taught in school that acres of rain forest were being destroyed by the second, and yet we still have rain forests. Honestly, I don't believe them. And if they are right, I'm not too worried about it anyway. The Bible says that this earth will be destroyed by God anyway. We can take care of what we've got now, but I'm not going to let what some scientist thinks is going to happen worry me." Rapture Ready BB, 2003. 

And yet... 

Science published an editorial by Agustín Fuentes, "The Descent of Man," 150 years on," 21 May 2021. My first encounter with the Agustin Fuentes' editorial was "Congratulations to Science Magazine for an Honest Portrayal of Darwin's Descent of Man" by Michael Flannery, Center for Science and Culture. This "center" is central to the Intelligent Design creationism movement.

In his editorial Fuentes insists that Charles Darwin "...baselessly asserted evolutionary differences between races. ... offering justification of empire and colonialism, and genocide, through "survival of the fittest." That could only be written by someone who had not read Darwin's work, or is incompetent.

Here is Darwin's summary on human races; "It may be doubted whether any character can be named which is distinctive of a race and is constant." The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (John Murray, London, 1871).