Industry & ResearchNewsResearch NewsTop Stories
Scientists lack consensus on the March for Science
In 2017, vaccines are falsely linked to autism; homeopaths make millions of dollars from snake-oil treatments they claim can cure cancer; and Scott Pruitt, a climate change denier, heads the US Environmental Protection Agency.
Please login below to view content or subscribe now.
“Willis said all parties across the political spectrum, “are guilty of cherry-picking the science they like and denigrating or ignoring the science that doesn’t fit their agenda”, and the protest shouldn’t solely criticise the current federal government.
This is exactly why the March for Science should not be, and as far as I have seen is not, partisan. But when a particular political party or government is egregious in its misrepresentation or outright denial of science, we should make a stand and draw attention to the damaging prioritisation of factless ideology over objective understanding.
It’s important to tip a hat though to the hoary old chestnut that reality has a left-wing bias. And there is actual psychological science to back that up…
The article is titled ‘Scientists lack consensus’.
A fairly standard example of how the media promote the disagreement in science rather than the agreement, because controversy makes catchier headlines than positive stories.
A pro-tertiary education forum such as Campus Review should use a positive headline and slant for this story – focus on the innovative nature of this ‘March for Science’, the support it is receiving, and the benefits of increased awareness of scientific thinking for the wider community.