Letters to the Editors, February 2007

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

The October 2006 issue covered the technological and theological, the massive and minuscule, the provocative and controversial. In "Impact from the Deep," Peter D. Ward took a fresh look at the earth's past with a theory that terrestrial heat and gases, not asteroids, most likely caused several mass extinctions. In "Viral Nanoelectronics," Philip E. Ross described how viruses coated with selected substances can be wrangled into self-assembling as liquid crystals, nano?wires and electrodes.

Controversially, "Darwin on the Right," by Michael Sher?mer, and "Let There Be Light" [SA Perspectives], both about reconciling science and religion, drew the lion's share of reader reaction. Although some welcomed a peaceful coexistence, more readers' opinions were closer to that of Michael C. Brower of Andover, Mass.: "To minimize the conflict between science and religion misses the point. If scientific laws are correct, God must be remote and removed. Religious Americans believe in a God who is engaged in human affairs. Science challenges their core belief. It does not help the cause to gloss over that fact."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American