Just to show how unsettling Nicholas Wade’s New York Times article, “Genetic Data and Fossil Evidence Tell Differing Tales of Human Origins” (July 26, 2012) is, over at Discover blogs, Razib Khan (blogging as “Gene Expression”) slams the Gray Lady:
The New York Times does a disservice by confusing what is really a within field controversy into one between two scientific teams.
The distinction he is making would escape most people.
What if he had said re the upcoming elections:
The New York Times does a disservice by confusing what is really a within the United States controversy into one between two political parties.
His article should be saved as a classic in entirely unfounded elitism: Don’t let the rubes know what a mess things are.
As if we didn’t …. As if any alert follower of the controversies couldn’t.
That would be like observing the United States elections and not noticing that there are two different parties running, and that they are in conflict.
By the way, the signature tune of establishment science journalism today is complaints about the need to cover both sides of a story. Here Khan scolds, “ The standard conflict/”two views” format is used, and to disastrous effect.”
In other words, news gathering is the problem. News manipulation is the solution.
See also: “Re human evolution: “There are probably more paleontologists than there are important fossils in the world.”
Follow UD News at Twitter!