Dang, why do I always wait so long to get in on these wonderful discussions? Most of the good stuff has been said already, and probably more eloquently.

I do have one answer for Roy, though. The Denver Museum of Natural History opened Prehistoric Journey about five years ago. It walks visitors through time, starting underwater in the oceans before life, er, became alive. It ends with a very realistic "Lucy" by John Gurche. The 17,000 square foot exhibit won the "Best Big Exhibit" award from AAM in 1995. During development of the exhibit, the desire not to alienate visitors or confront contradictory religious beliefs was given much thought. The exhibit doesn't make concessions at the expense of accuracy, and also offers some of the methods, evidence, and reasoning that form the basis of science. Since it opened, we've heard many great stories about Creationists "interpreting" the exhibit for other visitors!

Okay, I'm back on my soapbox. Our arguments seem to follow a simple pattern. One: As venues for science education, science museums should present the orthodox scientific viewpoint, just as Fundamentalist churches present their views absolutely, emphatically, and indisputably. Two: But the very nature of science is to question, to be objective, to look at all sides and consider every possibility.

Somehow this frequently leads to the idea that we should give equal time to non-scientific, unsupported, disproven, or discounted ideas in order to demonstrate our objectivity (not to mention the need to engage a public that widely accepts such ideas). Many science museums feel compelled to emphasize that the accepted body of scientific knowledge is subject to revision, that scientists are the first to admit that they may not be correct, and that not every scientist accepts everything in the scientific canon. While true, why should these aspects be given top billing?

Why don't we emphasize the reliability and the overwhelming body of knowledge on which most scientists agree, instead of the relatively few disputed details? Why do so many of us who are supposed to be getting people interested in science, instead tend to undermine people's confidence in it? Instead of saying that Einstein's model overthrew, disproved, or replaced Newton's, we should stress that Einstein's ideas are a refinement of Newton's, and that engineers and scientists still use Newton's laws on a daily basis. Instead of reinforcing the popular misconception that quantum mechanics makes plausible a whole range of nonsensical pseudo-science, why don't we educate our visitors about the very interesting realities of that field? 

Yes, there are disagreements and competing theories around the edges of scientific inquiry, but that needn't be our focus. Do the young-Earth folks center their presentations around the deep disagreements and major contradictions between their proponents? Why do we so often choose to nitpick the fine points of a much larger and better substantiated body of knowledge?

There are plenty of people and organizations doing a terrific job of questioning science and calling attention to any flaws. Let them fulfill that useful function. We should fulfill ours, which (IMHO) is to treat science as a reliable method of finding out what's true, of separating reality from opinion or wishful thinking, and of discovering how the universe works. As I've said before, we need to keep reminding ourselves that visitors with little knowledge of science have never been introduced to the ideas of controls, observer bias, reproducible results, rigorous proof, eliminating unwanted variables, statistical significance, blinded tests, experimental error, correlation vs. causation, etc. They need a context that helps them to understand the differences between a scientific theory (which is validated by objective evidence, is predictive as well as descriptive, and withstands determined examination) and the "theories" they encounter in media, popular culture, and less meticulous professions.

Chuck Stout
Exhibits Design and Development
Denver Museum of Natural History

========================================================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).