Americans are still scientifically illiterate — and scientists still need a PR team

[HuckleB]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/01/29/americans-are-still-scientifically-illiterate-and-scientists-still-need-a-pr-team/

"...

Usually when Americans gets surveyed about science, we learn that they don’t know a lot about it — and then we proceed to lament how dumb they are. In fact, we did that just last week, when we learned that Americans want to label food containing DNA. (Har har.)

But in 2009, Pew and AAAS dared to treat the problem as two-sided. They surveyed scientists, not just citizens — members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, no less. And they found that, hey, it takes two to tango in the science-society relationship, and scientists might, if anything, be more down on the public than the public actually was on them!

I recall all this now because a long-awaited successor to this classic report has now come out. Same game plan, same structure. Except for one thing — the overall framing seems to have subtly shifted back toward the old “public doesn’t know stuff” presentation. Perhaps not intentionally, but that’s how I suspect the report is going to be interpreted (whether its authors intend it or not).

The reason is the prominence of figures like this, showing just how wrong people are about factual stuff:

(go to the link to see)..."


Science matters. We need to utilize it to be truly progressive.

[immoderate]

1. The members of AAAS are no more scientists than the members of DU are politicians.

They are an affinity group and self monitored.

Science matters but this poll does not test the validity of science. It's pretty good at exposing American anti-intellectualism though.

--imm

[whatthehey]

11. True that. Actual working scientists would have more separation in these

[immoderate]

12. Anyone can join AAAS.

--imm

[whatthehey]

15. ermmm... yep. Which is why I said results from only actual working scientists would be different.

For example, separate studies from Powell, Cook and Lefsrud et al. recently showed that of actual working and published climate scientists, a vanishingly small percentage disavowed AGW, nowhere near as low a level of consensus shown in this more open universe of respondents. As I said, gaps using real experts only would be larger than those shown here.

[immoderate]

17. Climate stuff is based in science. No scientific study shows GMOs are safe.

Unless you can produce one...

--imm

[HuckleB]

2. Someone replied to the thread, but I can't see it.

Hmm. That could explain a lot.

[immoderate]

9. Obstinacy unbound!

--imm

[Juicy_Bellows]

3. NDT is doing his best as are others.

However, there is a wall of dumb out there and you can't hold your tongue forever.

Science used to be more prevalent in the media than it is now. It's hard to get people passionate when as soon as a good science paper comes out the powers that be immediately try to discredit it with their 'scientific counter view'.

Idiocracy here we come!
"Go away, 'baitin' "

[backscatter712]

4. Neil deGrasse Tyson is one hell of a one-man PR team for science.

He's completely awesome.

Bill Nye is also a great force for good.

[Juicy_Bellows]

5. Bill's total devastation of Ken Ham was a masterclass in ethical debate.

I don't know if anyone has had their ass handed to them so graciously. Cheers!

[Archae]

10. Yeah but...now Bill Nye is on the payroll of Monsanto!

You see, since Bill Nye was actually shown how Monsanto works, he's become a "shill" for them.

We've had a hatred of science around the world forever.
Especially if science challenges some tradition.

In India science shows "miracles" to be fake, the person exposing the fake gets death threats or is killed.
Here in the US, GMO hysterics use fake studies on rats to "prove" GMO's are "poison."

Even our news media is no help at all, if someone finds a fossil that hasn't been seen before, it's called a "missing link," even though that term is inaccurate and outdated.

In our entertainment mediums, those who embrace science are out to destroy the world, or will never get a girlfriend/boyfriend.

[Mendocino]

6. Yes

I've talked to seemingly intelligent individuals that reject evolution and climate change, but also simple things like the water cycle. They disregard concepts like evaporation and choose that all water is "new", that is just falls from the sky or bubbles from the ground. When I try to explain that yesterdays sewage is today's tap water, they look at me like I'm from Mars.

My SIL calls the California's water shortage a "so called drought" even though she lives there. No I say, it doesn't matter how many catchments there are if there isn't sufficient rainfall to fill them. When I bring up saltwater intrusion, top draw vs bottom draw intakes, land subsistence, aquifer depletion and degradation, she just blames it all on the environmentalists. Her only concern seems to be that their bushes and yard are turning brown. Yet this person has advanced degrees, go figure.

[longship]

7. By Chris Mooney!!

Author of The Republican War on Science and a fairly great science communicator himself.

R&

[HuckleB]

8. One of the few journalists who seem to understand science these days.

[miyazaki]

13. It's true.

Some of the greatest scientifically illiterate pinheads post right here.

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. Specifically, Mooney was calling for an *attacking* PR team

The point is, we have a lot of problems at the interface between science and society. But none of them are simple, and when people disagree with scientists, there’s often a lot more going on than mere scientific illiteracy.

In fact, in many cases, scientists’ opponents are deeply ideological and deeply dedicated — and, yes, smart. That’s the real science-society problem, and it’s one that we’re still only beginning to grapple with.

So the problem in the USA is that the anti-science people (eg creationists and Republicans) are allowed to get away with it. People need to stop pussy-footing around, and call them out as paid shills who are lying about reality.

[HuckleB]

16. Unfortunately, the anti-science people cross the entire political spectrum.

But, yes, all of them need to be called out. And DU should be a leader in calling ALL OF THEM out.

[immoderate]

18. Or just put them on ignore. That'll solve it.

--imm