Professor Lewis has every right to resign his position and to state his reasons for so doing. He alone is in a position to determine the reasonableness of his action. His disagreement with the APS's conclusion, however, lends credence to neither view, and were the situation reversed, the same conclusion should be reached: vociferous dissent, or assent, does not imbue one's position with correctness. Many great scientists have indeed been at odds with orthodoxy; so have many "crackpots". I would never presume to label Professor Lewis as either. Time alone will tell.
I stand by my earlier, "snarky" definition of pseudoscience; a favorite tactic of anti-science politicians is to dismiss a position they do not favor by saying "the science isn't there." What they mean, though, is that the scientific evidence with which they have been presented does not square with that which they wish to be true--the science *is* there, it's just, in their view, the *wrong* science.
[Disclaimer: Dr. Strickert once supervised me at our mutual place of employment. I shall not tell on him, and hope he will not inform on me, just how many (many many) years ago that was. While he and I disagree on matters political, I remain respectful of Dr. Strickert's positions and admire his rational, factual presentation of Professor Lewis's action and the questions it raises.]
________________________________
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu on behalf of Strickert, Rick
Sent: Mon 11-Oct-10 2:32 PM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] Prof. Hal Lewis resigns from APS
To no surprise, there doesn't seem to be a consensus on GW/CC or even on what steps have been taken or need to be taken on which to base a consensus or reasonable assessment.
What physicists and physics educators might address, here and to their students, is the action that Prof. Lewis took - releasing a letter given his reasons for resigning from the APS.
Presuming he was scientifically honest to himself and not "paid off" or mentally incompetent (documentation of which should be included in any such allegation), was Prof. Lewis' resignation a reasonable thing for a scientist to do given the conclusion reached from his assessment of the facts?
If the opposite situation were to have occurred, where Prof. Lewis would have argued his conclusion that the APS's dismissing GW/CC without scientific justification was a scam, would a similar letter of resignation from the APS still be reasonable?
Should a physicist weigh the certainty of his politically-sensitive scientific assessment being correct, and publicly disclosing it, in proportion to any tenure he is anticipating, the amount of grant-receiving career he has left, or perhaps the reputation he has earned to date?