I don't think this would work. They would, by and large, be outsiders, writing uncritical paeans, dictated by big name scientists. A new cadre of PR hangers-on does not sound like a great idea.

When it comes to young earth creationists we have a war on our hands, and nowhere more than in the USA. What's more it's a winnable war. Mooney & Kirshenbaum are all for appeasement, but appeasement won't work. It might please the more moderate wings of the church, but they already believe in evolution and are regarded by fundamentalists as being just as big an enemy as Myers and Dawkins. And, one must ask, who has done best at getting a wide public readership? P.Z Myers' blog, Pharyngula, has up to two million page views a month. Dawkins' book The God Delusion has sold three million copies. In comparison the bland and often rather condescending corporate science web sites get tiny numbers of hits.

But before we spend more time and energy to seriously consider Mooney and Kirshenbaum's proposed solution, they have to provide us with evidence that their plan can work. In the brief 132 pages of their book, they make grand, sweeping comments without taking the time to explain and substantiate their assertions.

To begin, they assume that we all know how scientific illiteracy will threaten our future, and they barely touch upon the reasons why we should be worried. More importantly, the authors must tell us what will improve if we have a new class of scientists trained to interact with the media, Hollywood, politicians, and the general public. Will we see faster research progress, better science funding, more scholarships for our children, more informed political debates that involve science? The payoff is never made clear.

Unscientific America has admirable goals, but it lacks substance. If you're interested in the topic, check this one out of the library or look through it at a bookstore before purchasing.

They [M&K] sensibly recommend that moderation of tone is important in such debates. The most polarizing kinds of argument can cause immediate emotional reactions that make it more difficult to have sincere conversations about the development of science.