In Shapley's report on the use of rain-making as a weapon in Indochina, a number of scientists express their opposition to such practices. Although one can sympathize with scientists who see their research put to ends other than those they envisioned, it is short-sighted to carp against each new technique for warfare. Wars seem to be part of human existence, and there are degrees of inhumanity in the way wars are fought. It would seem that causing a rainstorm to turn a terrain to mud is a more humane way of fighting than bombing the area. In World War I, millions of soldiers were ordered to leave their trenches and charge the opposing lines, whereupon they were gunned down. Should we return to that mode of fighting as a more humane method? We may wish that there were no wars. But we may wish that in vain. A more useful approach may be to study how to conduct wars in ways that destroy or maim fewer people than has hitherto been the case.
Language: en
", language="en", issn="0036-8075", doi="10.1126/science.177.4050.651-b", url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.177.4050.651-b" }