Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Becky Jungbauer | July 9th 2009 08:34 AM | 8 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
.

More A Truth Universally Acknowledged articles

All

About Becky Jungbauer

A scientist and journalist by training, I enjoy all things science, especially science-related humor. My column title is a throwback to Jane Austen's famous first line in Pride and Prejudice


... Full Bio

Obama nominated Francis Collins to lead the NIH today. Collins formerly served as the director of the NIH's National Human Genome Research Insitute (1993-2008) and helped run the Human Genome Project.

First Word quotes American Heart Association President Clyde Yancy as saying that Collins' real advantage "is the ability to translate deep and complex science to the lay population...in a meaningful way that allows it to be tangible and actionable."

Translation, good. But what about personal beliefs? Will his pro-religion stance play a role as director of a major source of our nation's research funding?

Wall Street Journal's Health Blog says Collins is "a devout Christian who doesn't see a conflict between religion and science." (Ironically, that statement followed a sentence on former NIH director Zerhouni's ban on conflicts of interest in researchers who receive NIH funding.).

What about Collins' work at BioLogos? The group is "led by a team of scientists who believe in God and are committed to promoting a perspective of the origins of life that is both theologically and scientifically sound." And what about his role as Senior Fellow for The Trinity Forum (albeit in a private capacity)? 

Are these conflicts of interest? Will they affect his ability to direct objectively? What do you think?

Comments

adaptivecomplexity's picture
Collins is not an unknown quantity - he led the NIHGRI for years. His abilities as a scientific leader have been demonstrated, and he seems to have the temperament needed to deal with Congress as NIH director.

All of this recent talk about Collins' religious beliefs, especially the attacks by PZ Myers and Jerry Coyne, give the mistaken impression that religious beliefs are a big issue within the professional science community. They aren't - in general, few people really care about their colleagues' religious beliefs, unless those beliefs support organized pseudoscience attacks on science, like intelligent design.  (And Collins certainly does not support intelligent design.) Collins is a highly qualified pick for NIH director.

And everyone with questions should follow the link above to Biologos. What's there is a pretty standard take on science and theism by people who don't reject science. Like I've said before, I'm not a believer myself, but I think the following is a fairly uncontroversial theistic effort to reconcile the science of prebiotic evolution with belief in God:

The study of life's origins is an exciting area of research. The jury is still out on how life first emerged. A simple response would be to give a God-of-the-gaps explanation: that some supernatural force, namely God, must have intervened to bring life into being.

But consider the timeline of these scientific quandaries. Life on this Earth appeared approximately 3.85 billion years ago, yet serious scientific study of its origins began just 60 years ago. A convincing scientific explanation may still emerge in the next 50 years. Though the origin of life could certainly have resulted from God’s direct intervention, it is dangerously presumptuous to conclude the origin of life is beyond discovery in the scientific realm simply because we do not currently have a convincing scientific explanation. Although the origin of life is certainly a genuine scientific mystery, this is not the place for thoughtful people to wager their faith. This kind of logic would mean God worked in some special way at this stage in the creation process only to allow the evolutionary process to yield later developments that did not require divine intervention. In contrast, BioLogos maintains God’s original and elegant plan for the universe included the potential for life to arise without necessarily requiring later supernatural engineering to jumpstart the process. In the BioLogos view, God’s sustaining creative presence undergirds all of life’s history from the beginning to the present.

Finally, as a purely technical matter, the theory of evolution does not propose an explanation to the question of the origin of life at all. The theory of evolution becomes relevant only after life has already begun.


If more religious believers adopted that stance, we'd be in much better shape. Biologos is doing science a service.

Hank's picture
I have never had an issue with Collins (though the more militant atheist, quite loud section of science blogging make is easy to think everyone does) because he has a personal belief that doesn't get in the way of science; exactly what everyone claims to want (even the ones who refuse to accept it's possible outside their pet causes).    

Collins has navigated the waters of big science for decades so he's qualified but diversity also cuts both ways, so Obama is practicing what his followers (85% of academia) preach in picking the best guy regardless of religion.

Becky Jungbauer's picture
I agree with both of you - I bring up the religious aspects specifically because of folks like PZ Myers, as you mention, Mike. This isn't a "heckuva job Brownie" nomination; this is a guy who actually knows what he's doing.

adaptivecomplexity's picture
And most scientists will be fine with this pick - there were some rumors floating around the blogosphere that scientists would be upset at Obama for picking someone so religious. That's crazy talk - it's a non-issue in the lab.

Hank's picture
Those rumors are started by people who are upset because Collins is not an atheist and want there to be a controversy.   Science has its own fundamentalists just like religion.

It is unlikely his religious views would be an impediment to his scientific work, and he has demonstrated that this is the case, apparently. His religious views, however, should be an asset to the NIH becasue he can address those who might be more likely to find their work objectionable. He seems to be a great choice. [His guitar pickin' ain't all that bad neither.]

Hank's picture
Scientifically, people should be more concerned about his populist posing on 'personalized' medicine.   That anyone casts doubt on his qualifications because of his religious beliefs is the kind of intolerance that the rabid dog atheists in science accuse religious people of ... if people can get behind Chu and the many carbon tax shills in Obama's administration, they can certainly give Collins a fair chance.

Becky Jungbauer's picture

That always interests me, how people from one extreme can rail against those in the other extreme. It's two sides of the same coin. George makes a good point above, I think - Collins would be better able to address some of the issues people have with relgion/science from an educated perspective.



Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.