Society Resolutions

AAS Mission and Vision Statement

Adopted 16 July 2021

The mission of the American Astronomical Society is to enhance and share humanity’s scientific understanding of the universe as a diverse and inclusive astronomical community.

The Vision of the AAS

To create a world where all people value and benefit from a scientific understanding of our universe.

Our Values

• Curiosity: We conduct research driven by our curiosity about the Universe.
• Integrity: We act with integrity, ethical behavior, and transparency as we perform our investigations and share our results.
• Inclusivity: We use fair and accessible practices to create a diverse and welcoming scientific community.
• Empowerment: We mentor and support our early career members, using our resources to create a positive environment for them and for our astronomical community.
• Sustainability: We accomplish our work using environmentally sensitive actions rooted in scientific understanding.

Policy on Resolution Approval Process

Adopted 24 May 2003 and Revised 19 October 2019

1. a) Draft resolutions of the AAS may be submitted to the Board of Trustees by AAS Divisions, Working Groups, Committees, or Trustees at any time.
   b) Draft resolutions may be submitted to the Board of Trustees by any full AAS member at any time if accompanied by the signatures of four other full AAS members.
2. The Secretary shall review the draft resolution and refer the draft to the Committee on Astronomy and Public Policy (CAPP) or to any other appropriate AAS Committee(s) or Division(s) as necessary.
   a) CAPP should review the draft resolution to determine any specific benefits or potential harm that may that may occur as a result of adopting the resolution.
   b) Other Committees or Divisions should provide advice on specific matters as necessary, e.g. planetary science, employment issues, education concerns, RFI mitigation.
3. a) Once the opinion of CAPP and any other cognizant body participating in the review process is received by the Board of Trustees, the Board should either adopt the resolution or proceed with discussion and review. The Board of Trustees may modify the resolution.
   b) Discussion by the Board of Trustees is recommended for those resolutions that are controversial in nature, that require the broadest possible discussion and debate, that may require additional expert input, or that require additional development prior to adoption.
   c) The Board of Trustees should establish a public comment period, of a reasonable length of time, that is made widely known to the membership, during the consideration of all resolutions, so that AAS members may comment on any proposed resolution.
   d) In cases requiring rapid action, the Board of Trustees may proceed to take action without a public comment period.
4. a) The Trustees must in all cases submit their consent in writing (including e-communications and certified polls) for the adoption of resolutions between meetings of the Board. The Board of Trustees shall deliver the resolution and the consents to the Membership. The Board of Trustees shall file the resolution and the consents with the Board of Trustees’ meeting minutes or with the corporate records. A Trustee can withdraw their consent by delivering a signed revocation (including by e-communications) to the Society prior to the delivery of the consents.
   b) A super majority of the Board of Trustees (2/3 of the voting members) is required for the adoption of any resolution.
5. a) AAS Resolutions should be reviewed each year by CAPP. A list of the resolutions that CAPP recommends be retained should be presented to the Board of Trustees at each summer AAS meeting.
   b) The Board of Trustees should decide which resolutions are retained for the coming year at each summer AAS meeting.
6. a) A list of the titles of the current AAS Resolutions and links to the full text on the AAS website should be distributed to the membership soon after every summer AAS meeting.
   b) The AAS Press Officer should be consulted on the best way to widely disseminate any newly adopted AAS resolution.

On AAS Resolutions

Adopted 24 May 2003

AAS Resolutions ordinarily should pertain to areas in which the Society has special expertise. In areas where the AAS lacks special expertise, but wishes to take a position, the President or their delegate should negotiate a joint resolution with a scientific society (or societies) having that special expertise, or consider an endorsement of a pre-existing position by another society (or societies).

On AAS Policy Actions

Adopted 24 May 2003 and Revised 19 October 2019

Occasionally the President may decide to take some action that does not require the adoption of a formal resolution in response to input from the Board of Trustees, a committee, working group, division, member, or on their own initiative. Examples include sending a letter to a government official or the media on a policy matter, joining other societies in signing such a letter, issuing Action Alerts to the membership, or thanking policy makers for taking some particular action. Activities such as these are called Policy Actions and are reported to the Board of Trustees in accordance with the by-laws. In the case of Action Alerts or Informational Emails, only the approval of the chair of the Committee on Astronomy and Public Policy is required to allow distribution.

AAS Statement on the 2020 Decadal Survey on Astronomy and Astrophysics

Adopted 10 November 2021

The American Astronomical Society enthusiastically endorses the Astro2020 Decadal Survey: “Pathways to Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics for the 2020s.” The massive collaborative effort represented by this report remains one of our most powerful tools for pushing the field forward. With its ambitious and balanced scientific portfolio, the report charts a sustainable and exciting path towards future discoveries over the next decade. The AAS urges the astronomical community to support the report and its priorities. 

AAS Statement on the National Research Council’s Report
Optimizing the U.S. Ground-Based Optical and Infrared Astronomy System

Adopted 12 September 2015

The American Astronomical Society* strongly endorses the recommendations of the recently published National Research Council (NRC) report Optimizing the U.S. Ground-Based Optical and Infrared Astronomy System.

Specifically, the AAS agrees with the report’s statement that our nation’s top priority in this domain should be a “system that is well coordinated and facilitates broad access to achieve the best science.” The AAS further endorses the report’s key recommendations on optimizing instrumentation for, and offering broad access to, the full suite of public and private telescopes; on developing the capacity to further investigate Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) discoveries; on identifying the facilities needed to realize other decadal survey priorities; and on continuing technology development and astronomer training needed for the future.

We are on the threshold of a new era of discovery in U.S. ground-based optical and infrared astronomy, given the incredible capabilities of LSST and the planned 30-meter telescopes. The scientific opportunities provide a compelling case for optimizing and advancing the country’s system of observatories, even if the National Science Foundation’s Astronomical Sciences Division (NSF/AST) does not yet have the resources to implement all of the report’s key recommendations without severely impacting program balance — the long-standing priority of the NRC’s decadal surveys.

NSF/AST has just released a public response to this NRC report, identifying the next steps to be taken in consultation with the broader astronomical community. Notwithstanding the constrained funding environment today, we encourage AST to use the report to advocate for additional resources and to partner with non-federal U.S. observatories to vigorously pursue this compelling ground-based optical/infrared astronomy program. The AAS is committed to helping achieve the important goals presented in the report.

*Because of their involvement with the NRC’s U.S. Ground-Based Optical and Infrared (OIR) Astronomy System study, Debra Elmegreen (Chair of the OIR study committee and Chair of the AAS Committee on Astronomy and Public Policy), Lynne Hillenbrand (member of the OIR study committee and of the AAS Committee on Astronomy and Public Policy), and Joel Parriott (consultant to the OIR study committee and AAS Director of Public Policy) all recused themselves from the issuance of this statement.

 

AAS Statement on Community-based Priority Setting in the Astronomical Sciences

Adopted 17 March 2014

The American Astronomical Society strongly endorses community-based priority setting as a fundamental component in the effective funding, management, and oversight of the federal research enterprise. Broad community input is required in making difficult decisions that will be respected by policymakers and stakeholders. The National Academies' decadal surveys are premier examples of setting priorities with extensive community input. Other National Academy studies, senior and portfolio reviews, standing advisory committee studies, town hall meetings, and mid-decade adjustments to the decadal surveys are also important components. These processes leverage the combined effort and expertise of the community to maximize the scientific return of the public and private investments in the astronomical sciences. These community processes are particularly beneficial during times of highly constrained budgets. Efforts that go outside these long-standing advisory processes in an attempt to benefit or harm specific projects or alter priorities are counterproductive and damage the scientific endeavor as a whole.

 

The Decadal Surveys Guide AAS Advocacy

Adopted 14 September 2011

The American Astronomical Society has in the past endorsed and continues to endorse the decadal survey priority-setting process used by the planetary, heliophysics, and astronomy and astrophysics communities. These surveys build a community consensus on the most compelling questions, priorities, missions, projects, and activities in each discipline, and provide guidance on priorities and balance when difficult funding decisions need to be made. The AAS stands behind the recommendations of all current decadal surveys and works to have them implemented.

In Support of Research in Astronomy Education

Adopted 2 June 2002, Albuquerque, NM

In recent years, astronomy education research has begun to emerge as a research area within some astronomy and physics/astronomy departments. This type of research is pursued at several North American universities, it has attracted funding from major governmental agencies, it is both objective and experimental, it is developing publication and dissemination mechanisms, and researchers trained in this area are being recruited by North American colleges and universities. Astronomy education research can and should be subject to the same criteria for evaluation (papers published, grants, etc.) as research in other fields of astronomy. The findings of astronomy education research and the scholarship of teaching, when properly implemented and supported, will improve pedagogical techniques and the evaluation of both teaching and student teaching.

The AAS applauds and supports the acceptance and utilization by astronomy departments of research in astronomy education. The successful adaptation of astronomy education research to improving teaching and learning in astronomy departments requires close contact between astronomy education researchers, education researchers in other disciplines and teachers who are primarily research scientists. The AAS recognizes that the success and utility of astronomy education research is greatly enhanced when it is centered in an astronomy or physics/astronomy department.

On the Protection of Radio Frequencies Used for Radio Astronomy

Adopted 11 June 1995, Pittsburgh, PA

"The continuing protection of the bands in the radio frequency spectrum allocated to radio astronomical observations is of great concern to the Council of the American Astronomical Society. Protection of the radio astronomical bands should include the effects of unwanted emissions from transmissions in nearby bands. Of particular current concern to the Council is the potential allocation of the band adjacent to the 15.4 GHz radio astronomical band to space-to-earth transmissions. Unwanted emissions from such an allocation have the potential to severely disrupt radio astronomical observations in the 15.4 GHz protected band. The Council respectfully requests the NTIA to consider the potential effects on radio astronomical observations of any plans for use of the bands adjacent to the 15.4 GHz protected band."

---

AAS Resolution in Support of LGBTQIA+ Individuals in Astronomy

Adopted 10 May 2023

LGBTQIA+ individuals have been part of the astronomical community since the beginning, even if they were not able to identify themselves as such at the time. We now recognize the loss caused by excluding LGBTQIA+ astronomers from fully contributing to our field. The American Astronomical Society is hereby publicly committing to creating a welcoming and inclusive environment regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. We urge all astronomical programs to formulate strategies to protect, support, and promote the success of LGBTQIA+ individuals so they can rise to their full potential in scientific careers.

AAS Statement on Undergraduate Research Experiences

Adopted 30 March 2019

The American Astronomical Society urges that every physics and astronomy department, to the fullest extent possible given available resources, provide its majors and potential majors with opportunities to engage in meaningful and appropriate undergraduate research experiences.

AAS Statement on Code of Ethics

Adopted 27 October 2018

Ethical behavior is a central value of the American Astronomical Society. The AAS believes that its members, its leaders, its staff, and all practicing scientists should uphold the highest possible ethical standards. The Code of Ethics of the AAS was adopted by the Board of Trustees to provide clear guidance for the ethical standards that must be followed by those who participate in our conferences, publish in our journals, receive recognition or grants from the Society, or work within or in support of our profession. Therefore, the Board and its Committees, Task Forces, and Working Groups must abide by the AAS Code of Ethics in their operations, in their work on behalf of the AAS, and when they make decisions that involve AAS members or others. All these committees' deliberations should incorporate the ethics record of nominees.

AAS Statement on Limiting the Use of GRE Scores in Graduate Admissions in the Astronomical Sciences

Adopted 4 January 2016

Each year, roughly 55,000 physical science majors take the Graduate Record Exam (GRE)^[1] and 5,000^[2] take the Physics Subject Exam (PGRE). Both the GRE and PGRE are widely used in the astronomical community as a metric to rank graduate talent. Most US graduate programs in the astronomical sciences require the GRE and PGRE to evaluate applicants. In addition, GRE scores are required by several major fellowships and are used to rank graduate programs by organizations such as US News and World Report^[3]and the National Research Council^[4].

The evidence, however, suggests that GRE and PGRE scores are poor predictors of success in graduate study in the astronomical sciences. Glanz (1996)^[5] demonstrated that GRE scores are weakly correlated with average grades in graduate physics courses at Harvard University. Sternberg & Williams (1997)^[6] demonstrated that GRE scores fail to correlate with several key skills for graduate study, including analytical thinking, creativity, research acumen and teaching, and correlate only modestly with first-year grade point average. Preliminary research indicates similarly weak predictive power for the PGRE^[7]. To be clear, the predictive power of these exams is not zero; longitudinal meta-analytic studies do find statistically significant linear correlation coefficients at the 0.1-0.2 level between test scores and long-term outcomes such as citations and scholarly output decades later. However, these correlations emerge only through multivariate analyses that control for the more dominant correlations of test scores with demographic variables — systematics for which graduate admissions committees rarely correct quantitatively.

Indeed, because the tests have such strong systematics, the use of GRE and PGRE scores as a measure of potential success has well-documented and powerful effects on the demographics of the resulting graduate cohorts. Halley et al. (1991)^[8] showed that GRE performance correlates with whether the undergraduate institution has a graduate program, implicitly penalizing students from many liberal arts colleges. Research by the Education Testing Service (ETS), and more recently by Miller & Stassun (2014)^[9], demonstrate that GRE scores correlate with demographic characteristics unrelated to potential for graduate study, such as gender, race and socioeconomic status. These correlations persist even in the GRE's recently revised general test^[10]. These demographic correlations are a feature of standardized exams more generally (e.g., Helms 2009)^[11] and may well be the result of stereotype threat, the fear of confirming negative stereotypes about one's own group (Steele & Aronson 1995)^[12],[13]. Miller & Stassun show that misusing GRE scores, particularly by establishing score thresholds, fuels the underrepresentation of white women and minorities in graduate programs. ETS itself states, “A cutoff score [on the GRE] should never be used as the only criterion for denial of admission or awarding of a fellowship.”

A third issue with the GRE exam is its financial burden on test takers. Students currently pay $195 to take the GRE^[14] and $150 to take the PGRE^[15], as well as $27 for each institution/fellowship they designate to receive an official score beyond an initial four. Considering that students often take these exams multiple times (particularly the PGRE) and apply to 5-10 graduate programs, these tests require a significant investment. While ETS has a Fee Reduction Program^[16] that covers 50% of exam costs, it applies to a single test and has stringent eligibility requirements. Fulfilling the GRE requirement is thus beyond the means of many students.

Based on this research, several physics and astronomy graduate programs and fellowships, notably the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) and the Ford Foundation Fellowship, have dropped the GRE and/or PGRE from their admissions or application requirements^[17]. The National Society of Hispanic Students (NSHP) recently called for a critical reevaluation of the use of the GRE as an admissions metric[18]. Nevertheless, Miller (2013)^[19] found that 96% of physics programs retain them, and over half specify cutoffs. As an alternative, some programs have begun to incorporate measures of non-cognitive skills (e.g., structured interviews that specifically assess these skills^[20]) as less biased and much stronger predictors of potential for long-term success.

Recommendation: Given the research indicating that the GRE and PGRE are poor predictors of graduate student success, that their use in graduate admissions has a particularly negative impact on underrepresented groups, and that they represent a financial burden for many students in pursuing advanced degrees in the astronomical sciences, the AAS recommends that graduate programs eliminate or make optional the GRE and PGRE as metrics of evaluation for graduate applicants. If GRE or PGRE scores are used, the AAS recommends that admissions criteria account explicitly for the known systematics in scores as a function of gender, race, and socioeconomic status, and that cutoff scores not be used to eliminate candidates from admission, scholarships/fellowships, or financial support, in accordance with ETS recommendations.

^{[1]http://www.ets.org/Media/Tests/GRE/pdf/gre_0809_factors_200607.pdf 
[2]http://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/practice_book_physics.pdf
[3]http://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/articles/2014/03/10/how-us-news-calculated-the-2015-best-graduate-schools-rankings 
[4]http://www.nap.edu/rdp/ 
[5]Glanz, J. (1996). How Not to Pick a Physicist? Science 274, 710 [
6]Sternberg, R. & Williams, W. (1997). Does the Graduate Record Examination Predict Meaningful Success in the Graduate Training of Psychologists? American Psychologist 52, 630-641 
[7]Miller, C. (2015), preliminary analysis presented at Inclusive Astronomy 2015, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96vJQCov8Do
 8]Halley, J. W. et al. (1991). The Graduate Record Examination as an indicator of learning of the curriculum taught to physics majors in US institutions. American Journal of Physics 59, 403 
[9]Miller, C. & Stassun, K.G. (2014). A test that fails: A standard test for admission to graduate school misses potential winners, Nature Careers 510, 303 
[10]https://www.ets.org/s/gre/pdf/snapshot_test_taker_data_2014.pdf
[11]Helms, J. E. (2009). Defense of tests prevents objective considerations of validity and fairness. American Psychologist 64, 283-284. 
[12]Steele, C.M., & Aronson, J. Stereotype Threat and the Intellectual Test Performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69, 797 
[13]A great resource on stereotype threat is http://www.reducingstereotypethreat.org/ 
[14]http://www.ets.org/gre/revised_general/about/fees
[15]http://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about/fees/ 
[16]http://www.ets.org/gre/subject/about/fees/reduction/
[17]See http://ainsleydiduca.com/gradschoolsdontrequiregre/#Sciences for a subset of these institutions. 
[18]http://www.hispanicphysicists.org/news/GREandDiversity.html 
[19]http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201302/backpage.cfm[
20]Stassun et al. (2011). “The Fisk-Vanderbilt Master’s-to-Ph.D. Bridge Program: Recognizing, enlisting, and cultivating unrealized or unrecognized potential in underrepresented minority students”, American Journal of Physics, 79, 374. See also http://fisk-vanderbilt-bridge.org/tool-kit/}

 

AAS Statement on Sexual Harassment by Faculty

Adopted 15 October 2015

Last Friday, news organizations reported that one of our colleagues, Prof. Geoff Marcy of the University of California at Berkeley (UCB), was investigated for having sexually harassed at least four women over a period of at least a decade. The two women mentioned by name in the news reports are respected AAS members. Prof. Marcy posted a letter of apology for his behavior on his website, which he also sent to the AAS and to several colleagues, and he has resigned from the UCB faculty and from his position as principal investigator of the $100 million Breakthrough Listen project searching for life beyond Earth.

Scientists do their best work in a respectful environment that “encourages the free expression and exchange of scientific ideas” — to quote the AAS Anti-Harassment Policy, which is codified in our Bylaws. The AAS Ethics Statement states that “All people encountered in one’s professional life should be treated with respect” and furthermore, that “More senior members of the profession, especially research supervisors, have a special responsibility to facilitate the research, educational, and professional development of students and subordinates.” The statement specifically mentions their responsibility for “providing safe, supportive work environments.”

The AAS deplores sexual harassment and expresses its unequivocal support for the people who risk their own professional status by speaking publicly in order to protect others from similar abuse.

The publicity surrounding the recent incident offers an important opportunity for all of us to discuss, within our groups and institutions, what responsibilities we have as professionals and how we can ensure that everyone in our profession is afforded a safe, supportive workplace within which they can thrive. It is unlikely this kind of behavior has occurred at only one institution, and each of us should look carefully to our own spaces. The AAS believes this is a moment in which we can improve our professional climate in important ways, and we encourage everyone to discuss harassment in astronomy with their colleagues and to contribute to its eradication. For our own part, the AAS will create a special task force to expand the AAS Ethics Statement to include procedures to be followed in the event that an AAS member violates any aspect of its provisions.

We live in a special moment for astronomy, with major discoveries and new worlds to uncover. It is a privilege to participate in the quest to understand our universe. If we pay attention to climate and accessibility in our teaching, learning, and research spaces, we will benefit from a broader talent pool, new ideas, and new energy. Astronomy will be the better for it.

On the Postdoctoral Application and Selection Process

Adopted June 1988, Kansas City, MO; Reaffirmed May 2003, Nashville, TN; Reaffirmed January 2006, Washington, DC

"The AAS Council is concerned about the procedures in the postdoctoral application and selection process. The postdoctoral experience now includes almost all recipients of the Ph.D. in Astronomy and Astrophysics. In recent years, deadlines for application and selection of postdoctoral appointments have advanced in the year and there is strong competition for new graduates.

To ensure an orderly and fair postdoctoral appointment procedure, the AAS Council recommends that the deadline for decisions on postdoctoral offers will not be required earlier than February 15th of a given year."

On Women, Under-Represented Groups and the Baltimore Charter

Adopted 11 January 1994, Washington, DC

"Recognizing the principle that the inclusion of women and other under-represented groups in the ranks of professional astronomers is important and highly desirable, the American Astronomical Society is committed to addressing issues of attitude and procedure that negatively impact any groups. The American Astronomical Society supports the goal of the Baltimore Charter, which is to promote a culture in which all individuals can realize their full potential in scientific careers. We recognize that there are many differences in the institutional structure of astronomical organizations, and that no single strategy is likely to be suitable to all of them. We do, however, urge all astronomical programs to formulate strategies that will enable them to realize the goal of the Baltimore Charter. We note that the AAS has already modified its bylaws to reflect commitment to this goal."

AAS Statement on the Teaching of Evolution

Adopted 20 September 2005

The American Astronomical Society supports teaching evolution in our nation’s K-12 science classes. Evolution is a valid scientific theory for the origin of species that has been repeatedly tested and verified through observation, formulation of testable statements to explain those observations, and controlled experiments or additional observations to find out whether these ideas are right or wrong. A scientific theory is not speculation or a guess -- scientific theories are unifying concepts that explain the physical universe.

Astronomical observations show that the Universe is many billions of years old (see the AAS publication, An Ancient Universe), that nuclear reactions in stars have produced the chemical elements over time, and recent observations show that gravity has led to the formation of many planets in our Galaxy. The early history of the solar system is being explored by astronomical observation and by direct visits to solar system objects. Fossils, radiological measurements, and changes in DNA trace the growth of the tree of life on Earth. The theory of evolution, like the theories of gravity, plate tectonics, and Big Bang cosmology, explains, unifies, and predicts natural phenomena. Scientific theories provide a proven framework for improving our understanding of the world.

In recent years, advocates of “Intelligent Design” have proposed teaching “Intelligent Design” as a valid alternative theory for the history of life. Although scientists have vigorous discussions on interpretations for some aspects of evolution, there is widespread agreement on the power of natural selection to shape the emergence of new species. Even if there were no such agreement, “Intelligent Design” fails to meet the basic definition of a scientific idea: its proponents do not present testable hypotheses and do not provide evidence for their views that can be verified or duplicated by subsequent researchers.

Since “Intelligent Design” is not science, it does not belong in the science curriculum of the nation’s primary and secondary schools.

The AAS supports the positions taken by the National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Science Teachers’ Association, the American Geophysical Union, the American Chemical Society, and the American Association of Physics Teachers on the teaching of evolution. The AAS also supports the National Science Education Standards: they emphasize the importance of scientific methods as well as articulating well-established scientific theories.

A PDF version of this statement with additional resources is available for printing and distribution.

 

On Creationism

Adopted 10 January 1982, Boulder, CO

"During the past year, religious fundamentalists have intensified their effort to force public school science classes to include instruction in "creationism." As defined in publications of the Institute for Creation Research and in laws passed or under consideration by several state legislatures, this doctrine includes the statement that the entire universe was created relatively recently, i.e., less than 10,000 years ago. This statement contradicts results of astronomical research during the past two centuries indicating that some stars now visible to us were in existence millions or billions of years ago, as well as the results of radiometric dating indicating that the age of the earth is about 4 1/2 billion years.

The American Astronomical Society does not regard any scientific theory as capable of rigorous proof or immune to possible revision in the light of new evidence. Such evidence should be presented for critical review and confirmation in the appropriate scientific journals. In this case, no such evidence for recent creation of the earth and universe has survived critical scrutiny by scientific community. It would therefore be most inappropriate to demand that any science teacher present it as a credible hypothesis.

We agree with the findings of Judge William Overton that the Arkansas creationism law represents an unconstitutional intrusion of religion doctrine into the public schools, that "creation science" is not science, and that its advocates have followed the unscientific procedure of starting from a dogmatically held conclusion and looking only for evidence to support that conclusion.

The American Astronomical Society deplores the attempt to force creationism into public schools and urges Congress, all state legislatures, local school boards and textbook publishers to resist such attempts."

AAS Statement on the Importance of Planetariums

Adopted 22 October 2008

The American Astronomical Society supports planetariums as an effective means to educate the public about the wonders of the night sky. More than 30 million people visit planetariums each year in the United States and more than 100 million do so worldwide. In our modern age, when most people live in cities where the night sky is drowned out by light pollution, planetariums offer an effective way to introduce the public to the motions of the planets, stars and comets. The projection of these objects onto the curved ceiling of a planetarium requires the use of sophisticated projection systems that are capable of projecting stars not only as they appear today, but as they appeared in the past and will appear in the future. Such projection systems are expensive, but their purchase and installation represent an important investment in the education of the public, and the AAS supports all planetariums in this endeavor.

On the Teaching of the History of the Universe

Adopted 11 January 2000, Atlanta, GA

"The American Astronomical Society (AAS) is the largest organization of professional astronomers in the United States. Its 6,000 members are men and women of all convictions and a variety of religious faiths. They work in ALL fields of astronomy, including the study of planets, of stars and of the Universe as a whole. Research in each of these areas, and in many other areas of astronomy, has produced clear, compelling and widely accepted evidence that astronomical objects and systems evolve. That is, their properties change with time, often over very long time scales.

Specifically, the scientific evidence clearly indicates that the Universe is 10 to 15 billion years old, and began in a hot, dense state we call the Big Bang.

Given the ample evidence that change over time is a crucial property of planets, including our own, of stars, of galaxies and of the Universe as a whole, it is important for the nation's school children to learn about the great age of, and changes in, astronomical systems, as well as their present properties.

More generally we believe that it is important to teach students the nature of the scientific method. Scientific inquiry involves the development and testing of hypotheses based on a systematic collection and analysis of data acquired through observations, experiments, and computer simulations. Science is not a collection of facts but an ongoing process, with continual revisions and refinements of concepts necessary in order to arrive at the best current views of the Universe. Science is unified; it is not possible to make use of scientific laws in one context, and then deny them in another. The same laws of science that govern — or empower — our advanced technology also underlie changes in time of astronomical systems. Science is not based on faith, nor does it preclude faith. Whatever personal beliefs teachers, students, parents or administrators may hold, the teaching of important scientific concepts, such as the formation and aging of planets, stars, galaxies and the Universe, should not be altered or constrained in response to demands external to the scientific disciplines.

The astronomical discoveries of the past century, many made by American scientists, are among the great triumphs of the human intellect, and we deeply regret any attempt to ignore them or deny them.

Children whose education is denied the benefits of this expansion of our understanding of the world around us are being deprived of part of their intellectual heritage. They may also be at a competitive disadvantage in a world where scientific and technological literacy is becoming more and more important economically and culturally."

This Statement was distributed to the AAS Membership in Newsletter #100, June 2000. A PDF version is also available for printing and distribution.

AAS Statement on Satellite Constellations

Adopted 8 June 2019

The American Astronomical Society notes with concern the impending deployment of very large constellations of satellites into Earth orbit. The number of such satellites is projected to grow into the tens of thousands over the next several years, creating the potential for substantial adverse impacts to ground- and space-based astronomy. These impacts could include significant disruption of optical and near-infrared observations by direct detection of satellites in reflected and emitted light; contamination of radio astronomical observations by electromagnetic radiation in satellite communication bands; and collision with space-based observatories.

The AAS recognizes that outer space is an increasingly available resource with many possible uses. However, the potential for multiple large satellite constellations to adversely affect both each other and the study of the cosmos is becoming increasingly apparent, both in low Earth orbit and beyond.

The AAS is actively working to assess the impacts on astronomy of large satellite constellations before their numbers rise further. Only with thorough and quantitative understanding can we properly assess the risks and identify appropriate mitigating actions. The AAS desires that this be a collaborative effort among its members, other scientific societies, and other space stakeholders including private companies. The AAS will support and facilitate the work by relevant parties to understand fully and minimize the impact of large satellite constellations on ground- and space-based astronomy.

AAS Resolution on Light Pollution

Adopted 4 January 2017

The AAS endorses IAU 2009 Resolution B5 "In Defence of the Night Sky and the Right to Starlight," affirming that access to a dark night sky is a universal human right, making quality outdoor lighting a worldwide imperative.

The AAS endorses the American Medical Association's CSAPH Report 2-A-16 (May 2016) on "Human and Environmental Effects of Light Emitting Diode (LED) Community Lighting".

The AAS calls on all US communities to adopt the following principles for outdoor lighting:

1. Full cutoff shielding: No light should escape above the horizontal from all outdoor light fixtures.
2. Spectral management: Blue light should be minimized everywhere and light sources should be as monochromatic as possible near critical observatory and natural sites.
3. Control of light level: Light levels should be properly matched to location, time, and vehicle and pedestrian traffic, with the added goal of energy efficiency and long-term sustainability.

To realize its mission to enhance and share humanity's scientific understanding of the Universe, the AAS calls on all its members to take local action in support of dark skies.

AAS Resolution on Being an Environmentally Responsible Nonprofit Organization

Adopted 6 January 2013

Environmental challenges are among the most important issues facing human society today. The AAS, as a responsible nonprofit, has adopted a "green policy" for its office practices and established a Sustainability Committee dedicated to fostering awareness and participatory social responsibility for all AAS members. These initial steps are insufficient actions given the scope of environmental and other challenges we face today. Therefore, the AAS resolves that, while undertaking activities to fulfill its mission, it will demonstrate responsibility for the natural world, the people who work to implement its projects and programs, its own financial security and longevity, and society more broadly.

American Astronomical Society Endorsement of AGU's 2012 Statement on Climate Change

Adopted 6 January 2013

In its 2012 statement on Climate Change, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) has reconfirmed that there is compelling evidence of human impact on the climate system with potentially far-reaching consequences for ecological and political systems. The AGU has made a powerful case that increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere significantly contributes to the warming of the global climate. The AGU recognizes that the climate system is complex, and there are uncertainties in climate projections that are made. However, it notes that there are no known sources of uncertainty that could make the impact of climate change inconsequential, and it recommends substantially reducing our net annual CO2 emissions.

There are numerous aspects of this complex, multi-disciplinary problem that fall within the realm of astronomy, such as solar variations, planetary atmospheres, radiative transfer and numerical modeling. Our fundamental approach to interacting with the world -- collecting reproducible large datasets, using state-of-the-art detectors, reconstructing remote phenomena, understanding the world through physical models, and employing sound statistical analyses of significance -- are highly congruent with the modus operandi of earth scientists.

The American Astronomical Society (AAS) acknowledges the AGU’s careful review of the current body of knowledge using sound scientific methodologies, and recognizes its collective expertise in scientific subfields central to assessing and understanding global change. The AAS joins the AGU in calling for continued peer-reviewed climate research to inform climate-related policy decisions, to provide a basis for mitigating the harmful effects of global change, and to help communities adapt and become resilient to extreme climatic events.

Multi-Society Endorsement of National Dark Sky Week

Adopted 5 January 2003

The American Astronomical Society (AAS) and the International Dark Sky Association (IDA) hereby endorse National Dark Sky Week, a grassroots effort to highlight the beauty of the night sky and to draw attention to the ever-increasing levels of light pollution across the United States caused by poorly designed lighting.

The AAS and the IDA believe that the opportunity to experience the natural night sky should be available to every citizen of our Nation. This natural resource, which inspires our attempts to understand the cosmos, should be protected through the use of well-designed lighting systems that put light where it is needed and not waste energy through unnecessary illumination of the sky. Properly designed lighting systems provide safety and convenience without polluting one of our greatest natural assets.

The American Astronomical Society and the International Dark Sky Association encourage all Americans to use the evenings of April 1st to April 8th 2003, from 10 pm to 12 am (ET & MT) and 9 pm to 11 pm (CT & PT) to attend public star parties, visit their local planetarium or public observatory, or simply go outside to a safe, dark location to enjoy the wonder of the night sky. Learning the constellations, observing the planets, wondering about the stars and the Milky Way are one of the most basic of human experiences and should be enjoyed by all.

National Dark Sky Week is also endorsed by the Astronomical League, a non-profit federation of 250 astronomical societies and nearly 20,000 members and Sky and Telescope magazine.

More information on National Dark Sky Week is available at this site.

APS Statement on National Security and Open Conduct of Science

Adopted by the APS Council 21 May 1999; endorsed by the AAS Executive Committee July 1999

The Council of the American Physical Society emphasizes the critical connection between U.S. national security and scientific research activities. Effective national security requires the highest standards of vigilance and circumspection, and the science on which it is based must meet the highest standard of excellence. However, national security will ultimately be damaged if the underlying science suffers as a result of government practices that indiscriminately discourage or limit the open exchange of ideas.

The Council of the American Physical Society recognizes the great importance of protecting classified information. We urge Congress and the Executive agencies, in carrying out this responsibility, to employ measures and practices that will maintain the strength and effectiveness of the scientific activities on which national defense relies.

Over the course of many years, immigrant scientists as well as foreign visitors and students have contributed enormously to the American scientific enterprise. They have enriched our knowledge and culture, promoted the growth of our economy, and improved the quality of our lives. Any negative characterization of scientists on the basis of ethnic or national origins is destructive to science and American values.