Conservatives are ‘right to be skeptical of scientists’

Post Reply New Topic

To me, science is all about skepticism. In science, we should always be skeptical of our own findings and of each other's and even of laws -- why? To minimize bias. We need to be ready to accept new findings and open to all possibilities, even those that might seem absurd (and there are instances in which the absurd would later turn out to be proven the most likely).

Personally though, the average joe needs to not concern itself with science as much as they currently do -- too often are people unaware of what they're supporting or not supporting and that can have serious consequences (of course, there should still be concern but not to an extent that makes most people look foolish in front of those who are knowledgeable in the field). There are too many people that ignorantly "worship" scientists while others just oppose them at every corner, and I've experienced this on both sides, just depends on which field and which person, as well as area (for example, the conservatives in my area are very environmentally conscious, almost everybody here is, and tend to be more accepting of environmental scientists, while, from what I note, the more traditional conservative is often more favorable of geologists and more opposed to environmental scientists).

They get told what to do by lobbyists. They really should use their own minds a bit more. Hopefully now after Brexit we'll have more evidence-based parliamentary policy. Parliament can go back to doing its stuff and mainly staying out of the everyday affairs of the common man as much as possible.

I find it disheartening that people are losing respect for evidence-based, quality, peer-reviewed science in favor of opinions.

Corporate-funded or politically-funded science I have far less trust in as there is an inherent bias toward whatever interest is paying for the research. It's amazing how many Monsanto researchers have found that Roundup herbicide is not a carcinogen. To listen to them, you might even consider pouring it on your breakfast cereal [insert sarcasm here]. For years all we had was industry research on GMOs because seed companies refused to provide samples to independent researchers. Of course the conclusion was that they were perfectly safe. Eventually independent researchers did obtain sufficient samples and--surprise, surprise--the findings are that they may not be so benign. Oh, and Roundup is carcinogenic.

But those are examples of research in one's own self-interest, cherry picking facts to support a foregone conclusion.

What concerns me is that independent, rigorously conducted research and proven science is no longer considered reliable when it proves inconvenient to one's opinions or self-interest. Science is the opposite of opinion. It's what's true, not what one wants to be true. It's the metric by which one measures the truth. Facts are not subjective.

The social and political climate being what it is, I am not surprised that the actual climate change which has been documented, studied and researched for the last 5 decades with resoundingly conclusive results is being pooh-poohed as "liberal hype." A single paper written by a doctor who was lying and admitted to it under pressure (thus having his medical license revoked) is used to justify not vaccinating against horrible, preventable diseases when the overwhelming preponderance of evidence to the contrary shows that vaccines do not cause autism. Thus we're seeing outbreaks of diseases that were almost eradicated.

The satirical "newspaper" The Onion had a headline that made me want to laugh and cry at the same time. It said, "Climate Researchers Warn Only Hope For Humanity Now Lies in Possibility They Are Making All Of This Up."

I don't think there's much chance of Brexit changing anything on that front! There were a few areas where the EU was worse than Britain (pesticides, genetic modification), but an awful lot where it was better. It is extraordinarily far-fetched to suggest that Brexit is going to cause politicians to develop scientific literacy and decreased sensitivity to lobbying.

Indeed, Euroscepticism, and the risk of related social unrest, are presently driving us away from EBP on a lot of issues. Immigration is the obvious one, but also trade harmonisation and energy interconnection. And on those issues where you could justifiably pick bones with the EU's position, it seems likely that Gove will maintain their standards in order to placate the green lobby.