Producing a State of Fear

So I am generally enjoying the novel. As has been said, very predictable and easy to read and downright cliche sometimes. However, I think there is some important stuff going on in the novel, and I think the character of Nicholas Drake is an interesting one to look at. Very early in the novel, when he and Evans and Morton visit Iceland, Drake is attempting to persuade the scientist there to publish some "misleading" info. Then we are hit with this gem, courtesy of Drake, "

“No,” Drake said, “I couldn’t make him understand. Scientists can’t adopt that lofty attitude anymore. They can’t say, ‘I do the research, and I don’t care how it is used.’ That’s out of date. It’s irresponsible. Even in a seemingly obscure field like glacier geology. Because, like it or not, we’re in the middle of a war—a global war of information versus disinformation. The war is fought on many battlegrounds. Newspaper op-eds. Television reports. Scientific journals. Websites, conferences, classrooms—and courtrooms, too, if it comes to that.” Drake shook his head. “We have truth on our side, but we’re outnumbered and out-funded. Today, the environmental movement is David battling Goliath. And Goliath is Aventis and Alcatel, Humana and GE, BP and Bayer, Shell and Glaxo-Wellcome—huge, global, corporate. These people are the implacable enemies of our planet, and Per Einarsson, out there on his glacier, is irresponsible to pretend it isn’t happening.” (51)

Whoa! Seeing devices, paradigms, human and non-human agents, REALITY, we have got it all here! I instantly thought of our class when I read this, and I think a central tenant in our discussions has been the question of if there is truly un-biased science. Here Drake says there isn't such a thing any more, and people need to take their science and their results with an ethical grain of salt, as they will affect the REAL world. Now lets be clear, I don't really like Drake, and the reasons are obvious from the plot of the story. But this is a good explanation of how science really does work, and Drake, forever the ethical realist criticizes the scientist who whose integrity will not be compromised. Drake does a nice job of summing up the idea that science is done in a vacuum. "Per Einarsson, out there on his glacier, is irresponsible to pretend it isn’t happening.” Is there such thing a true science that is directly separate from other real cultural and political factors? Drake doesn't seem to think so, and I think this ties in perfectly into how this novel is doing the same kind of work.