>> Loeb was a once-respected scientist who made important contributions to astrophysics and cosmology, particularly when it came to black holes and the first stars. But his work on extraterrestrial signatures continues to be largely unappreciated by the community — a position as justifiable as ignoring the comparable idea of Russell’s teapot — and rather than address their scientific objections, he’s stopped listening to other astronomers entirely, instead choosing to try his scientific case in the most unscientific place imaginable: the court of public opinion.
This is an attack piece that targets Avi Loeb's character. It's disturbing that the author of the piece is himself an astrophycisist and I have to wonder, if Avi Loeb is calling upon the court of public opinion, what else is this piece, published in Forbes rather than a science venue, doing exactly?
Science is a debate. For there to be a debate, there have to be differing opinions. And for there to be differing opinions, there has to be the freedom of scientists to express their opinions. Even poorly supported opinions like Avi Loeb's. What hurts science is bombastic invocations of "the large amounts of research done by other professionals who specialize in this particular field" - as an attempt to stiffle an opionion the author is not fond of with an appeal to authority.
This is an attack piece that targets Avi Loeb's character. It's disturbing that the author of the piece is himself an astrophycisist and I have to wonder, if Avi Loeb is calling upon the court of public opinion, what else is this piece, published in Forbes rather than a science venue, doing exactly?
Science is a debate. For there to be a debate, there have to be differing opinions. And for there to be differing opinions, there has to be the freedom of scientists to express their opinions. Even poorly supported opinions like Avi Loeb's. What hurts science is bombastic invocations of "the large amounts of research done by other professionals who specialize in this particular field" - as an attempt to stiffle an opionion the author is not fond of with an appeal to authority.