【正文】 uneasy relationship with other aspects of culture. Think of Gallileo’s 17th century trial for his rebelling belief before the Catholic Church or poet William Blake?s harsh remarks against the mechanistic worldview of Isaac Newton. The schism between science and the humanities has, if anything, deepened in this century. Until recently, the scientific munity was so powerful that it could afford to ignore its critics but no longer. As funding for science has declined, scientists have attacked “antiscience” in several books, notably Higher Superstition, by Paul R. Gross, a biologist at the University of Virginia, and Norman Levitt, a mathematician at Rutgers University。 and The DemonHaunted World, by Carl Sagan of Cornell University. Defenders of science have also voiced their concerns at meetings such as “The Flight from Science and Reason,” held in New York City in 1995, and “Science in the Age of (Mis) information,” which assembled last June near Buffalo. Antiscience clearly means different things to different people. Gross and Levitt find fault primarily with sociologists, philosophers and other academics who have questioned science?s objectivity. Sagan is more concerned with those who believe in ghosts, creationism and other phenomena that contradict the scientific worldview. A survey of news stories in 1996 reveals that the antiscience tag has been attached to many other groups as well, from authorities who advocated the elimination of the last remaining stocks of smallpox virus to Republicans who advocated decreased funding for basic research. Few would dispute that the term applies to the Unabomber, whose manifesto, published in 1995, scorns science and longs for return to a pretechnological utopia. But surely that does not mean environmentalists concerned about uncontrolled industrial growth are antiscience, as an essay in US News amp。 World Report last May 考研英語(yǔ)真題 7 seemed to suggest. The environmentalists, inevitably, respond to such critics. The true enemies of science, argues Paul Ehrlich of Stanford University, a pioneer of environmental studies, are those who question the evidence supporting global warming, the depletion of the ozone layer and other consequences of industrial growth. Indeed, some observers fear that the antiscience epithet is in danger of being meaningless. “The term ?antiscience? can lump together too many, quite different things,” notes Harvard University philosopher Gerald Holton in his 1993 work Science and AntiScience. “They have in mon only one thing that they tend to annoy or threaten those who regard themselves as more enlightened.” Text 4 Emerging from the 1980 census is the picture of a nation developing more and more regional petition, as population growth in the Northeast and Midwest reaches a near standstill. This development and its strong implications for US politics and economy in years ahead has enthroned the South as America?s most densely populated region for the first time in the history of the nation?s head counting. Altogether, the US population rose in the 1970s by million people numerically the third largest growth ever recorded in a single decade. Even so, that gain adds up to only percent, lowest in American annual records except for the Depression years. Americans have been migrating south and west in larger number since World War II, and the pattern still prevails. Three sunbelt states Florida, Texas and California together had nearly 10 million more people in 1980 than a decade earlier. Among large cities, San Diego moved from 14th to 8th and San Antonio from 15th to 10th with Cleveland and Washington. D. C. dropping out of the top 10. Not all that shift can be attributed to the movement out of the snow belt, census officials say, Nonstop waves of immigrants played a role, too and so did bigger crops of babies as yesterday?s “baby boom” generation reached its child bearing years. Moreover, demographers see the continuing shift south and west as joined by a related but newer phenomenon: More and more, Americans apparently are looking not just