Is “Science” Used To Deceive the Public?
Here’s a piece making its way around Facebook, suggesting that a great deal of what passes for science is BS, created to deceive the public.
The very kindest think I can say about this is that it’s extremely irresponsible.
Perhaps the author should learn a bit about how science has:
• eradicated many dread diseases from the globe, including smallpox, polio, and malaria
• almost doubled our life expectancies in the last century
• enabled 5.5 trillion passenger miles to be flown on U.S. airlines since 2010 without a single fatality (think: to the sun and back 600,000 times)
• brought hundreds of key species back from the brink of extinction
• given us the technology to transition to environmentally benign lifestyles
• expanded food production to accommodate a population that has quintupled in the last 60 years, and
• put men on the moon, as well as explored the nature and origins of the universe.
Would he still make such an asinine accusation? I doubt it.
If his position isn’t disingenuous, maybe he waves off medical science when he’s sick or injured. Again, unlikely.
Craig,
My goodness ! What on earth are you getting so upset and outraged about ?
Gavin Nascimento’s article is well reasoned, moderate, balanced and responsible.
His basic concern appears to be opposition to people who elevate “scientific” theories and “scientists” to create a new sort of religion and priesthood.
I would have thought he made that obvious when he wrote:
” This is not to say that the concept of science does not serve an important purpose, because it certainly does; I personally use scientific methods and principles daily in my life, and even relied on scientific research to highlight corruption within the scientific community in this blog. But this was written specifically to remind us all that “science” can be used to deceive us — has been used to deceive us — and should always be questioned as a result”.
Anyone reasonable person reading the above paragraph, including most scientists would applaud his logic.
From the level of indignation and outrage contained within your response you appear to be exactly the sort of advocate he described. Someone who has suspended reason and adopted some “science” and “scientists” as the basis of a new religion to be “blindly be obeyed” and “infallible”. Your response perfectly fits his description of those who become so outraged by anyone who questions their “high priests of science”, they must instantly be ” attacked, degraded, and dismissed as modern day heretics”.
Surely, Gavin Nascimento’s motto “ALWAYS QUESTION EVERYTHING” is in itself a very ‘scientific’ premise, don’t you agree ?
The list of scientific theories and beliefs that turned out to be incorrect( often with disastrous consequences), is far too lengthy to publish here, and what would be the point ?
Each individual is entitled to inquire and decide for himself the validity of any scientific pronouncement.
Gavin Nascimento’s position is far more responsible than narrow minded advocates claiming any particular brand of “scientific” proposition, or the pronouncement’s of any particular group or individual “scientist”, to be infallible and must not be questioned.
Such advocates are the true enemies of Scientific Endeavor.
There are a few examples of bad science – eugenics comes to mind – and usually there is a departure from real science – or at lease ethics and humanity – in such examples. However, blanket statements carry a high risk of inaccuracy, and there are far too many spewers of anti-science blather who either don’t understand the scientific method and/or don’t appreciate its findings.