Chairman's message...

Our heartfelt thanks to the efforts of our many members who helped make the Wellington meeting such a success. The papers aroused great interest, and it was extremely gratifying to see the number of media reporters who stayed around simply to listen, long after they had fulfilled their obligations to their employers.

Media coverage was good too, especially for Peter Dady's comments on alternative medicine, which were carried by the Press Association nationwide. Too bad that the coup attempt in the Philippines pushed television coverage of our press conference off the 6.30 pm national news (as TVNZ intended) and onto the Wellington local news! But we look forward to some of the material produced by the convention showing up on National Radio, since they were there taping the entire proceedings.

As we move into the third year of our existence as an organised group, I would identify three primary areas of our concern. First, there are the "standard" issues of paranormal claims—the claims of psychics, astrologers, clairvoyants, and so forth. Second, there are the continuing attempts by the creationists to give credibility to their religiously-inspired pseudoscience. And third, there are the claims of alternative medicine, involving various forms of pseudoscience and quasi-occult beliefs.

All three areas are important, but I believe that the first area has perhaps gotten enough attention from us for the present. Parapsychology was a specialty of our first chairman, Prof. David Marks, I have been to some smaller extent involved in it since the Mary Fry episode, and I know it continues to be a major interest of many of our members. It is also an area of continuing fascination on the part of the media. Yet as important as this area remains, I feel that for the next year we should work harder to direct our attentions to alternative medicine and creationism, which are perhaps of greater importance from the standpoint of current public policy.

The growth of user pays in the spheres of medicine and education will quite possibly be paralleled by demands for "greater choice" in medicine and education. This could mean many citizens will feel that since they are in part paying for these "'services," they have a right, for example, to demand that the government support from its end the teaching of creationism in the schools or the activities of iridologists and homeopaths in the field of medicine. These issues should be approached by us with well-chosen and carefully planned projects. Here are some ideas:

Alternative Medicine: Peter Dady's Wellington presentation struck me as extremely well calculated. He stressed the ways orthodox medicine protects the interests of patients against the potentially harmful claims or fantasies of alternative and quack medicine. He quite properly emphasised that alternative medicine tends to be promoted by. the white, articulate, and affluent ('"Tao-seeking yuppies," as the Listener put it), while it is the brown, poor, and inarticulate of New Zealand society who are perhaps the most in need of efficient, effective, sciencebased medicine. Peter described the naturopathic campaign against immunisation, again pointing out whose children are dying or are having their health permanently impaired by meningococcal meningitis and hepatitis (and it's not generally the kids who attend the schools of Remuera or Fendalton).

This is a very good and robust approach, and I hope other members, especially our many medical doctors, will keep up the attack in whatever ways they think most effective. I also hope that when Bernard Howard returns from Scotland we will be able finally to organise our test of iridology. Dr. Bill Morris has opened the possibility supplying some iris photographs, and a number of our members have expressed a willingness to help with the project (briefly, it involves supplying iridologists with sets of iris photographs and to see if they can identify at a level greater than chance the afflictions, if any, of the persons whose irises are depicted). If you think you might be able to help, let us know.

Creationism: Despite the recent American Supreme Court ruling against the creationists, I think they will continue to be a threat to science education in New Zealand. After the recent appearance of Gordon Hewitt and Dr. Arthur Wilder-Smith on George Balani's programme, George opened the phone lines for listener comment. He almost wished he hadn't, because the phone rang off the hook with solid creationists the whole rest of the night, and the night following. (Thanks, incidentally, to George, who gave himself a cram course in geology, paleontology, evolution, etc., and acquitted himself very well.)

One thing that emerged from those hours of radio was how very widespread in New Zealand is the mistaken idea that being a believer in God or being Christian must somehow entail that one believes in "scientific" creationism. To this end, I think that what this country needs is an organisation of committed Christian scientists and educators who are willing to make public their opposition to the creationist agenda. Call it "Christians Against Creationism," "Christians Opposed to Pseudoscience," or some such, and make it clear to the press and public of New Zealand that a belief in God or in the moral authority of the Bible does not imply that one must believe in the pseudoscientific fictions of the creationists.

I wish I could help in getting such a group off the ground, but the move must come from committed Christians, and I, alas, am a hopeless heretic. Perhaps NZCSICOP could be of some assistance in forming such a group. Do any of our religiously inclined members have any interest in this?