The publisher of Science magazine is calling for better communication of science, but one organization doesn't think that is really what he is after.
In a recent editorial, Science publisher Alan Leshner writes, "Public understanding of science not only affects people's ability to appreciate and make full use of the products of science, it also contributes to the extent of support for scientific research."
Cal Beisner, founder and national spokesman of The Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, interprets Leshner's statement differently.
"So in other words, if the public doesn't understand science well enough, we're not going to get enough tax money to support our research -- and after all, as scientists, we want to do that research and we want to be supported by tax money so we have to get the public to understand science better," he paraphrases Leshner's remarks.
Leshner also writes "there is no shortage of topics where policy-makers or other members of the public seem to persistently misunderstand, misrepresent or disregard the underlying science: as in climate change, genetically modified foods, vaccines or evolution, among others."
Beisner feels that Leshner is not so much interested in the public understanding of science, as he is the public embracing particular conclusions.
"Those conclusions, in turn, direct the spending of public monies. So it's not really so much science that he wants to communicate better -- it's particular public policy-related conclusions," Beisner concludes.