Mike Solana

Genetic engineering is controversial, and in the context of modifying humans the topic has gone fully nuclear in the mainstream press. I believe we need to defend the subject broadly, and the scientists working in the field specifically.

Throughout time our most important thinkers have been attacked for being different, and here's the thing — we all KNOW this is true. And we all KNOW the radical ideas, the crazy people, are what moves our civilization forward. We worship the heretics of our culture's past. BUT.

While our most famous scientists alive talk about "the plight of the scientist" broadly, note these people are themselves almost never controversial. They're defending canon. No one with power is disagreeing. We reward the contrarian aesthetic, but never the actual thing.

What's the last position Bill Nye's taken that's gotten him in trouble with the New York Times? Or Neil DeGrasse Tyson? These men make their living on the illusion of controversy, while our actually controversial scientists find themselves increasingly at risk.

Our cultural response to genetic engineering has been hysterical and insane. China might kill a man because of bad press. This is textbook Dark Ages shit. Where's the celebrity defense of controversial research now?