Question:  Do any of you know if there is a
relationship between Dr. Owen Gingrich and Newt
Gingrich of political fame and ignominy?

--- John Stoke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I tried to post these comments on Thursday, and
> again on 
> Friday, but I think we were having server problems.
> Perhaps 
> this one will take...
> 
> **************************
> Dear Colleagues,
> 
> My institution, which is the science and operations
> center 
> for the Hubble Space Telescope, appropriately
> requires that 
> the communication of personal opinion be identified
> as such, 
> and as not representative of views held or endorsed
> by the 
> institution or its governors or sponsors. I hereby
> so 
> declare, and suspect that this message will testify
> to the 
> wisdom of that regulation!
> 
> A good number of months ago while in a bookstore I
> spotted a 
> book in the astronomy section entitled "The
> Privileged 
> Planet." (This is the book upon which the movie
> under 
> discussion is based.) One of the first things I do
> when a book intrigues me is to see whether its dust
> jacket 
> contains an endorsement from anyone I know. I found
> these 
> two:
> 
> "This thoughtful, delightfully contrarian book will
> rile up 
> those who believe the 'Copernican principle' is an
> essential 
> philosophical component of modern science. Is our
> universe 
> designedly congenial to intelligent, observable
> life? 
> Passionate advocates for the search for
> Extraterrestrial
> Intelligence (SETI) will find much to ponder in this
> 
> carefully documented analysis." - Owen Gingrich,
> Harvard-
> Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
> 
> and
> 
> "Impressively researched and lucidly written, The
> Privileged 
> Planet will surely rattle if not dislodge a pet
> assumption 
> held by many interpreters of modern science: the
> so-called 
> Copernican Principle (which isn't actually very 
> Copernican!). But Gonzalez and Richards' argument,
> though
> controversial, is so carefully and moderately
> presented that 
> any reasonable critique of it must itself address
> the 
> astonishing evidence which has for so long somehow
> escaped 
> our notice. I therefore expect this book to renew -
> and
> to raise to a new level - the whole scientific and 
> philosophical debate about earth's cosmic
> significance. It 
> is a high class piece of work that deserves the
> widest 
> possible audience" - Dennis Danielson, Professor of
> English, 
> University of British Columbia.
> 
> Owen Gingrich is a respected historian of astronomy
> (and 
> please note his affiliation with a scholarly
> component of 
> the Smithsonian Institution) and has given invited
> talks to 
> our science staff as part of our academic colloquia
> series.
> 
> Dennis Danielson is the editor of an acclaimed
> anthology of 
> cosmological writings entitled "The Book of the
> Cosmos." He 
> was an invited lunchtime speaker at an American
> Astronomical 
> Society a few years ago, and subsequently was an
> invited 
> colloquium speaker here for a talk entitled "The
> Great 
> Copernican Cliché," a presentation that generated a
> more 
> spirited discussion afterwards than most that I have
> 
> experienced here.
> 
> When (still in the bookstore) I flipped through the
> book I 
> found hundreds of citations from the scientific
> literature, 
> respected journals such as the Astronomical Journal,
> the 
> Astrophysical Journal, and so on.
> 
> Since this promised to be the kind of
> science-related book 
> that I enjoy the most, one that endeavors to
> synthesize data 
> and advance an interesting point of view supported
> by that 
> data (in this instance, the point of view that there
> really 
> is something special about the earth), and since one
> of the
> co-authors is a bona-fide university research
> astronomer (I 
> didn't know much about the Discovery Institute and
> its co-
> author), I bought it and read it.
> 
> I read a lot of astronomy books and I found this one
> to be 
> more thought-provoking than many. The attributions
> by 
> Gingrich and Danielson were, on the whole, accurate;
> the 
> book is written in a humble tone and gives the
> reader a lot 
> to ponder. It's a rather gentle presentation of
> ideas and I 
> found the modesty and near-tentativeness of the
> authors' 
> tone ingratiating. I didn't detect anything that
> struck me 
> as particularly sinister or anti-science (there were
> no 
> appeals to the Bible, no appeals to god-of-the-gaps 
> miracles), although the book does promote a view
> that is 
> certainly not in line with fashionable philosophical
> 
> worldviews within academia. I did not find the
> arguments 
> overwhelmingly convincing -- it's more of a
> door-opener to 
> some new ideas -- but they certainly did cause me to
> 
> consider the difference between well-entrenched
> assumptions 
> in cosmology and conclusions supported by data.
> There were 
> literally dozens of moments in which I found myself 
> reacting "Hmm. hadn't thought of that before."
> (Example: 
> Could the fact that spiral galaxies have observed
> radial 
> metalicity gradients across their disks mean that
> there are 
> galactic 'habitable zones' (places where the
> proportion of 
> heavier elements enables the development of life)
> akin to 
> the 'habitable zones' thought to exist around stars
> (places 
> where the temperature and thermal stability are
> conducive to 
> life)? Interesting idea.)
> 
> The book does not deal (at least not to my
> recollection) 
> with the biological "Intelligent Design" dispute,
> but is 
> more an advancement of a point of view with respect
> to 
> the 'anthropic principle' in cosmology, and it could
> be 
> considered an extension and expansion of arguments
> put forth 
> by Ward and Brownlee in their book "Rare Earth."
> Perhaps one 
> could think of the book's subject as being a
> 'cousin' to ID 
> in that, like ID, it argues for the notion that
> intention or 
> purpose could be inferred from characteristics of
> nature. 
> Overall I'd say that the book deals with the kind of
> 
> questions that resonate greatly with the public:
> "OK, you've 
> collected lots of data, now tell me: What does it
> all mean?" 
> Perhaps it could be said to straddle the line
> between 
> physics and metaphysics. I enjoy books like that,
> even if I 
> don't necessarily settle into agreement with an
> author's 
> position. I would like to think that science museums
> could 
> be venues for interesting discussions about 'what
> the data 
> mean, or might mean.' So long as a discussion is
> clearly 
> identified as such, and properly distinguished from
> the data 
> itself, it could provide an invigorating reminder of
> one of 
> the reasons science is done.
> 
> I have not seen the video, and don't have any plans
> to, but 
> I do have a hard time imagining how the elaborated
> arguments 
> in the book could be reduced to that format. The
> book's 
> force depends on the gradual accumulation of a lot
> of 
> individually small ideas and observations and I
> don't see a 
> short video doing that nearly as well. (But of
> course I 
> could be wrong, having not seen it.)
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> John Stoke
> 
> 
> John M. Stoke
> Manager, Informal Science Education
> E/PO Lead, The James Webb Space Telescope
> Office of Public Outreach
> Space Telescope Science Institute
> 3700 San Martin Drive
> Baltimore MD 21218
> USA
> Tel +1 410 338 4394
> Fax +1 410 338 4579
> [log in to unmask]
> http://hubblesource.stsci.edu
> http://jwstsite.stsci.edu/
> 


Indigo Nights
[log in to unmask]

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).