Monday, September 23

Study on Science Denialism Reveals Surprising Results

Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr +

Troy Campbell and Lauren Griffin in Scientific American reported that individuals who reject vaccinations and the consensus within the scientific community on climate change or global warming can, and often do, embrace the scientific research and facts from other areas of science.

In April, numerous people will be marching across America in the “March for Science” and will use it as a platform to push against the anti-scientific movements within the country. This is based on the November, 2016 elections in United States to some degree.

Credit: Jonathan Nackstrand Getty Images

The comprehension of science or the appreciation of science at the very least are becoming more, and more, important. It is reported that there are television shows and spokespeople devoted to proper science and the consensus in the scientific community in addition to the proper dissemination of that consensus to the public in a respectful and constructive manner.

However, there are sceptics of climate change. As well, there are anti-vaccination initiatives throughout the US. One misconception pointed out is that people in general distrust scientists. In fact, based on a Pew Research Center poll done in 2015, people respect scientists in healthcare, food, and the environment.

It is the same for vaccinations. In other words, scientists and science have moderate to moderate-high levels of respect in the United States. Another misconception is that people do not use scientific findings and arguments. In fact, people will use scientific findings.

The difference is someone using what they believe to be credible scientific findings that aren’t and others who will use actually credible scientific findings, usually based on the scientific consensus among experts or those that know what they’re talking about.

Another misconception is that the disagreement with the scientific consensus or the scientific research findings are the main motivation or even a motivation for the denialism; whereas, the reality of the matter is that the implied solutions of scientific findings will motivate denial.

So, for instance, Republicans will more likely agree with climate science if within a market solution framework, which means a political ideological stance more appropriate to Republican principles of governance and political life.

One more misconception is that the correctness of facts is the reason for the denial of science by the “anti-science”. The reality is that “people often denying the relevance of facts, not just their correctness.” In other words, the situation is not as clear-cut in terms of denial is as one might think. People have their reasons.

Share.

About Author

mm

Scott Douglas Jacobsen is the Founder of In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal and In-Sight Publishing. Jacobsen works for science and human rights, especially women’s and children’s rights. He considers the modern scientific and technological world the foundation for the provision of the basics of human life throughout the world and advancement of human rights as the universal movement among peoples everywhere.

1 Comment

  1. Please PLEASE do not call these deniers Sceptics. Sceptics look carefully at evidence and the sources of that evidence. They are willing to change their view in light of good new evidence. These deniers are not interested in changing their minds or looking for evidence that doesn’t suit their worldview.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.