By the way, whether you meant to give that impression or not, your
description of how new members are "elected" suggests that scientists are
selected for membership without their consent; that once chosen they are
required to be members whether they want to be or not. Obviously you didn't
mean that, but your rebutal to my description that new members are invited
to join suggests this alternative view. In fact, once a new scientist is
elected for membership he is then issued an invitation to join. He may
decline if he wishes; as I understand it a fair number have. The same
people tend to get elected each time, until they become members or they
decline often enough that their names are withdrawn from consideration. I
was told that's why I've been issued so many invitations (that and my
friends keep my name in circulation). Membership is certainly an honor, but
it is not the divine acension to the Olympus of science you make it out to
be. Again, it is your affair whether you believe me or not, but perhaps the
next time I am invited to join I will do so, so that I can speak with the
authority of an actual member.
As such, based on my direct experience with the NAS, as well as the
"intimate" knowledge of it that I have acquired from its members, I continue
to maintain that the poll says more about the general opinion of the NAS
(which I tend to agree with based on what I know) than it does the general
opinion of "leading" scientists.
Kevin L. O'Brien