Access

Published online 25 March 2009 | Nature 458, 393 (2009) | doi:10.1038/458393a

News

Canadian science minister under fire

Comments on evolution spark fierce criticism.

It's been a rough month for Canada's minister of science and technology. Gary Goodyear, who was appointed to the new position in October 2008, has been roundly criticized in the media for an outburst during a meeting with a university teachers' group and for his comments on evolution.

Comments

Reader comments are usually moderated after posting. If you find something offensive or inappropriate, you can speed this process by clicking 'Report this comment' (or, if that doesn't work for you, email webadmin@nature.com). For more controversial topics, we reserve the right to moderate before comments are published.

  • I would think that the fittest scientific researchers would be able to evolve to survive with less funding...

    • 25 Mar, 2009
    • Posted by: Jeff Harvey
  • To Jeff Harvey, Or the underfunded could go extinct when competing against better funded rivals in other countries.

    • 26 Mar, 2009
    • Posted by: James Stewart
  • After reading this story I couldn't figure out what was wrong with the Canadian science minister's way of answering some evolutionary questions that are really unrelated with his job and the tasks he was handling at that time. I wish those unsatisfied with his real job do not use a person's personal belief as an excuse for criticizing a public official. Science is not just about evolution because evolution is just one subject of scientific study. How is Goodyear doing in managing the large money for the large picture of science? That should be the real issue in discussion. Shi V. Liu (SVL@logibio.com)

    • 26 Mar, 2009
    • Posted by: Shi Liu
  • It is not about the "fittest" researchers surviving, it is about basic science surviving in the current funding climate. It is terribly short-sighted to make major cuts to basic science and assume that applied science (those funded by private industry) will either not be affected or perform the same function. When basic science suffers in any country the effects are felt down the road.

    • 26 Mar, 2009
    • Posted by: Chris Lane
  • In response to Shi Liu: As a Canadian scientist myself, I would argue that the problem with the minister's comments aren't his beliefs, per se, but the fact that it's clear when reading his comments, that he doesn't really even understand the basis of evolution by natural selection. What's more troubling, is that since being in office, the current government has seemed to have a disregard for basic science; they've done such things as eliminate the post of the National Science Advisor to the Prime Minister. As well, they've ordered the 3 national granting agencies to cut their budget by $148 million, at the same time when the current budget is going to go $35 billion in debt in order to stimulate the economy. The fact this government's minister of science and technology doesn't believe in, nor understand evolution is just the icing on the cake. Religious belief is a funny thing though, do you think there would be any question of resignation if the minister of citizenship, immigration and multiculturalism made a comment against interracial marriage, or if the minister of state (for the status of women) confirmed a belief that the place of a woman is at home with the children? Probably not.

    • 26 Mar, 2009
    • Posted by: Sean Parsons
  • We have a Facebook group, Protect Science Funding in Canada, with over 2,300 members (as of Mar 26, 2009) and growing. Please consider joining if you care about the future of Science funding in Canada. http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=66987670090

    • 26 Mar, 2009
    • Posted by: Paul Gribble
  • What I'd like to know is, what the hell is a chiropractor doing playing a scientist in the Canadian government anyway? Not even George Bush had the cohones to do that.

    • 01 Apr, 2009
    • Posted by: Kevin O'Connor
  • I think it's important to remember that evolution isn't just a small section of science. These are the basic principles upon which other research must build. If you don't understand evolution by natural selection, then I would be seriously doubtful of your capacity to make science funding recommendations. However, this is a government that believes humans walked with dinosaurs, like the Flintstones (seriously, see Stockwell Day). I don't think a basic understanding of the fundamental principles of science it their priority. A chiropractor? Really? You couldn't find someone you actually go into med school?

    • 02 Apr, 2009
    • Posted by: Sagan Theriault
  • ***I don't think a basic understanding of the fundamental principles of science IS their priority. A chiropractor? Really? You couldn't find someone WHO actually GOT into med school? (That should make a bit more sense now - note to self: proofread)

    • 02 Apr, 2009
    • Posted by: Sagan Theriault
  • It is dangerous to have a minister of science placing his religious beliefs above accepted scientific notions, a sure sign of Bush-era thinking espoused by the Harper adminstration.

    • 09 Apr, 2009
    • Posted by: Tabrez Siddiqui