There are those…and we know who they are…who deny science fact simply because it differs from their stubbornly held preconceived notions otherwise known as faith. Faith relies on a need to believe, fact/truth doesn’t.
Exactly!! Although I differ with your wording just a tad, your sentiment is basically spot on. I have tried to tell people for years...I do not have a need to believe in God. (A preacher friend of mine, though, says he thinks I have more faith than any ten people standing in my presence.) And, while I do not have a need to believe in climate change, either, it doesn't matter! I cannot deny it when it's right in front of me. I'm 63 - old enough to remember that our seasons have not always been so harsh. Old enough to be blown away by the heat wave in Europe last year.
It would be a wonderful thing if we could all be my age (or older) and have the ability to see clearly how our progress has destroyed the Earth - for even just the next ten minutes.
“Our realities” have no relation to the hard, provable truth. Perception is wholly dependent on interpretation and interpretation frequently diverges from proven fact.
If you want a sublime demonstration of “our realities” based upon perceptions and perceptions based upon beliefs, tune in to Fox News for a brief moment.
I once had an acquaintance who perceived that the horizon is flat. He believed that the obvious curvature is an illusion. He therefore believed that the earth is flat.
Semantics, although I respect your right to disagree. Some things cannot be proven. Like God. Yet, people the world over believe in God; he is their one true Savior, the basis of their existence, and the only solid reality in their worlds.
I don't need a sublime demonstration of "our realities," and I choose not to tune into Fox News because I find it sickening, frankly. Still, OUR perceptions become OUR realities. I know you're trying to say that proven fact equals reality, period. I do get that. But, what I'm saying is, try to tell that to all those who don't see those proven facts the way others do.
This all goes back to Ari's original question, to wit: "If everyone denies the facts, are they still facts?" Like the age-old question "If a tree falls in the woods, and there is no one around to hear it fall, does it still make a sound?" "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?"
Arguments exist for both subjective reality and objective reality. MY POINT boils down to this: One side isn't going to just miraculously convince the other one day. Not gonna happen. There is no easy answer! But with one side proposing solutions, and the other side screaming "Unconstitutional!" or claiming wokeism, or fascism, or whatever obstructionist word they can hurl out there to make the masses think our government is trying to control their lives...it seems as if nothing ever will get done.
I'd like to think that, at some point, someone with some common sense is just going to go ahead and pass some concrete laws dealing with climate change regardless of the inevitable objections. But, we all know those laws will head straight to the Supreme Court and perhaps only about half will survive. It is very frustrating.
Intelligence too frequently has no relation to common sense. No matter the reality, many people will seek confirmation of their preconceived beliefs. Hence, Fox News.
I teach biology at a major university. There are so many aspects of biological science that students (and society) push back on because of their feelings and beliefs. Evolution is a big one, and one might think that a refusal to believe in evolution doesn’t matter. Well, mutations in a virus and how well it transmits matter. Climate change matters if organisms can’t evolve to live in a warming climate. Of course, if one doesn’t believe in Covid-19 I guess its mutations in it are irrelevant. I resent being ruled by superstitions and beliefs based on nothing. Evidence matters.
Also, just because an individual was able to make tons of money in crypto does not automatically make them an expert in anything else.
Why are we so afraid of listening to people who actually know what they’re talking about?
As a 'soon to be 70yo' female "child of the 60's" with 2 stubborn, grown daughters, might I respond from my perspective to your last question in one word: Fear. Of the unknown, of the inability to find absolute answers or resolution to that one emotion.
In the 1970s, I attended a major church-affiliated university. During our biology class one day when we were briefly discussing hermaphrodites, a fellow student spoke up to tell us all that the only thing worse than philosophy was science! And, with that statement, he slammed shut his book and marched out of the room. All I could say was "Oh." I really didn't know what to make of it, and I'm still stumped. But, the moment has stayed with me.
Excellent bit. This is the kind of stuff I wish I could read every morning. Tyson's powerful statements that science is "a process of querying nature" and that it is the objectivity of science that leads to the discovery of truth, hints that sometimes people don't want to recognize that the questions change - the "querying nature" - which can clarify what is true. Seems that it causes too much discomfort for people who crave a black and white, unchanging, solid ground only.
Queries evolve and new proofs are presented all the time. (For instance, 16th and 17th c. astronomers Copernicus and Galileo argued and proved heliocentrism; until then, the Church enforced through the torture of the Inquisition, that geocentrism was known fact). As Tyson says, it's the unemotional objectivity of science that will lead to the truth. We just have to develop our sea legs and enjoy the ride.
Improvements in technology allow us to test our queries. As our abilities to test, observe, and analyze improve, our questions about how things work will uncover things people even 10 years ago couldn’t do.
I love how your interpretation of “science as a process of querying nature” lands with developing our sea legs and enjoying the ride! What a ride it has been so far!
There is science, there are facts, and there are people who think they know better than anyone else. Sadly, many of the leaders of our country fall in the third category because if they admit the truth of the first two, they would not be as "powerful" as they think they are. There is an old saying "if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your BS". That seems to be the plan of many currently in government and we will all pay the price if we don't vote them out.
Interesting and accurate assessment, as always. The next steps here, as I see it, are to address the psychological element. Denial is a defense mechanism employed when someone does not want to face reality. The climate crisis is an existential threat that is too profound for many people to confront. It’s easier to deny it. Also, while the problem is getting worse rapidly and exponentially, compared to the average term of a human life, it can seem like the consequences may arise in the distant future (as opposed to the truth that they are manifesting now). It’s human nature to put off issues until there is an immediate and urgent need to resolve them. Another factor is that the average person is relatively powerless in affecting real reversal of climate change. So it would take sustained, massive pressure from people petitioning their governments to take action. I don’t have any concrete answers here, but it seems to me we have to change the hearts and minds of people en masse first and then organize.
I agree, and maybe working on changing the minds of people while organizing? It’s a long and hard process to change the hearts and minds of people for sure, and it is critical. When breaking down seemingly insurmountable psychological obstacles, focusing on the baby steps helps.
I think you’re right, Nancy. My concern is the threshold for what constitutes a “crisis” to world leaders may be quite high. And the delay in taking action will result in irreversible damage — with the cost being the lives of many humans and animals.
I agree with you!!! I love being a Democrat but I do think just a Democrats drag their feet!!! I don't know what's worse anymore the Republicans with all their lies or the Democrats who do nothing!!
You're absolutely correct!! It just seems like Trump is nipping at our heels---and time is running out!!!! The thought that Republicans will take over the Senate in the house is almost more than I can bear!! I know I'm putting that pretty strongly!! I'm 78 and I won't be here for the Long haul if they do take over but I do fear for those who have to live with the results for years to come if the Republicans win!!!
I mean, I agree, Nancy. Whenever I worry out loud to my best friend about the threat of losing our democracy, he matter-of-factly states some variation of, "I'm not worried. If the Republicans destroy our democratic institutions and turn the country into a fascist dictatorship, then we'll have a revolution." He means it as a tongue-in-cheek joke (and the deadpan delivery is funny), yet there is some truth to it. Whenever one party "over-reaches," there is push back. Of course, the concern is that the push back usually comes in the form of voting out the overreaching party -- something that may not be available to Americans if the election system is tampered with and voters are entirely disenfranchised. However, we have the ability to take to the streets. And if the United States is turned into a police state in response to those protests, then there will be a horrific revolution to be sure, because Americans across the political spectrum would not tolerate that for too long. So, carrying this scenario to it's logical end, even if we lost one form of democracy, it would not be long (maybe a generation or two) before we'd return to some kind of democratic republic. Or at least, that's what I like to believe.
"Science is a systemic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe."
"Alternative Facts", are unrealism, nonsense, delusions, fallacies, and untruths.
Too many deniers are helping destroy the democracy our founding fathers fought so hard to establish..
The the last line in your piece, " If you don't see that, we're all in trouble". Neil DeGrasse Tyson is correct, and I hope Americans will see what is happening before it's too late.🙏
I had these same thoughts ( expressed in your essay) when I saw this movie. Does art mimic life or life mimic art? Some people reject, deny, fear facts. Others are open , accepting and reactive. It seems today this is true in every single facet of life. Trying to understand human behavior is a never ending roller coaster ride. Have a great day!
I love the title of today’s newsletter: If everyone denies the facts, are they still facts?
Yes they are still facts because facts are supported with objective evidence and fact checking😃
In my world (science/ research and development), facts are supported with data through studies, observations and validations. Facts are established with justification.
Also, in science there are hypothesis and hypothesis testing.
A theory or an assumption is called hypothesis and this is the starting point for further investigation.
Hypotheses are tested through statistics and from the outcome of the results, the conclusion of the hypothesis is rejected or fail to reject.
I just realized that I misunderstood the question!!! Thank you for putting it in such a way that I was able to get to the gist of the question ⁉️ the truth never changes
I can’t imagine how not sharing reality portends for humans and the planet they inhabit. Vigorous disagreements about what to do regarding this shared reality is fair game in my opinion. Facts that are empirically based are supposed to be modified as new information occurs; that is proof of science working. Science is not the answer for everything but it supports epistemology rather than magical thinking. I think that’s what Tyson was saying. For me the hunger that many people have to believe alternative reality is worthy of notice and support. I appreciate that existential hunger. I just feel that hunger is being exploited and supplanted with autocratic expansion. That sounds so sinister to me. I appreciate how you provide information without subjugation
Yes! The facts are the facts! Sadly people would rather believe someone they like rather than check into what they are saying. Believe you me, Mr. Melber, survivors all over this country know what is fact and what is not (our trauma has given us a heightened sense of discerning the truth from a lie)! We would love to take a megaphone and scream the facts to the top of our lungs until those who need to believe them, believes them!
It's beyond bizarre. I reflect back on growing up in what seems like a totally different world. Empirical observation bolstered by scientific trial is the ONLY acceptable way to form a belief system. Once that is called into question, you enter the world of make believe and/or denial of concrete evidence. The question is, "Why has this been forsaken by so many people?" Facts are based on repeatable and observable methodology. There are no "alternative facts." There is only the pathologic state of delusion for which we will pay dearly.
Objective truth is essential to a functioning, enlightened society. The monopoly of truth is what caused the Dark Ages. Mass communication; ie., movable type helped us out of the darkness. Now, mass communication is threatening society by spreading none truths. Reasonable regulation, such as modifying immunity for social platforms must be implemented before it destroys us!
We seem to live in an upside down world what was truth is no longer truth, science has been here to help and guide us, it seems some of us would perfer to believe we know everything, which we do not, we open ourselves to have faith, trust and learning.
On this journey call life, we learn new things everything day, when we go to our doctor if we have a medical issue we have faith and trust the he will do whatever he can to make it better. Science , medicine etc., are here to help us learn and understand old and new things. It is sad when we close ourselves off from learning, does not matter what age we are we should not close ourselves off the world is here to be explored. Great article as usual. Thank you😊👍
When I was in the 4th grade (I'm 63 now, so it's been a while, but I remember this as if I learned it yesterday) we were given this definition of science: "Science is an organized body of knowledge that helps us understand the past so we can create and/or predict the future." Outside of the definition, our teacher also taught us that things change. For example, polio wasn't always a thing. AIDS, Ebola, a round Earth, climate change. . .who knew?!
I am amazed by people who won't see what is right in front of them. Shrinking glaciers, massive forest fires, and how many tornadoes in Mississippi already this year?! On the other hand, they believe pedophile rings exist in the basement of Papa John's and that elections were stolen - all with absolutely zero evidence.
On the other hand, I do not believe in God. I love the "idea" of a God, but I don't believe such a thing exists anymore than does the tooth fairy or the Easter Bunny. And, I don't believe it because I don't see any evidence of it. I'm not one to take things at face value or to believe something just because I'm told it's true. People have given up trying to tell me the evidence is staring me in the face...it's right there in front of me if I'd only look!
I wholeheartedly believe in Science. I can see it, hear it, smell it, taste it, and hold it in my hands. So, while it's easy for me to be frustrated with "those stupid people" who don't believe in Science, I know a lot of people who are equally as frustrated with me. Every day I wonder what is the solution.
Your short discussion about believing or not believing in science at the end there is inappropriate since science is not an object of faith. It’s a process by which the curious attempt to replicate the behaviors of an observed thing to learn what makes it what it appears to be as opposed to something else.
I don’t know where to post this, but I need to be heard: You have spent time talking about Student Loan debt…what about someone approaching 75 who went back to school at 55 and finished BA, Masters and Teaching Credential. Taught pre-k special Ed for 15 years… What about my $70000 in Student Loans???
There are those…and we know who they are…who deny science fact simply because it differs from their stubbornly held preconceived notions otherwise known as faith. Faith relies on a need to believe, fact/truth doesn’t.
Exactly!! Although I differ with your wording just a tad, your sentiment is basically spot on. I have tried to tell people for years...I do not have a need to believe in God. (A preacher friend of mine, though, says he thinks I have more faith than any ten people standing in my presence.) And, while I do not have a need to believe in climate change, either, it doesn't matter! I cannot deny it when it's right in front of me. I'm 63 - old enough to remember that our seasons have not always been so harsh. Old enough to be blown away by the heat wave in Europe last year.
It would be a wonderful thing if we could all be my age (or older) and have the ability to see clearly how our progress has destroyed the Earth - for even just the next ten minutes.
Whether we believe or not is irrelevant. Reality will speak for itself.
But, our realities are very often based upon our perceptions. Our perceptions are influenced by our beliefs.
I disagree.
“Our realities” have no relation to the hard, provable truth. Perception is wholly dependent on interpretation and interpretation frequently diverges from proven fact.
If you want a sublime demonstration of “our realities” based upon perceptions and perceptions based upon beliefs, tune in to Fox News for a brief moment.
I once had an acquaintance who perceived that the horizon is flat. He believed that the obvious curvature is an illusion. He therefore believed that the earth is flat.
Belief->perception->belief confirmed->”our reality”.
Incorrect.
Semantics, although I respect your right to disagree. Some things cannot be proven. Like God. Yet, people the world over believe in God; he is their one true Savior, the basis of their existence, and the only solid reality in their worlds.
I don't need a sublime demonstration of "our realities," and I choose not to tune into Fox News because I find it sickening, frankly. Still, OUR perceptions become OUR realities. I know you're trying to say that proven fact equals reality, period. I do get that. But, what I'm saying is, try to tell that to all those who don't see those proven facts the way others do.
This all goes back to Ari's original question, to wit: "If everyone denies the facts, are they still facts?" Like the age-old question "If a tree falls in the woods, and there is no one around to hear it fall, does it still make a sound?" "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?"
Arguments exist for both subjective reality and objective reality. MY POINT boils down to this: One side isn't going to just miraculously convince the other one day. Not gonna happen. There is no easy answer! But with one side proposing solutions, and the other side screaming "Unconstitutional!" or claiming wokeism, or fascism, or whatever obstructionist word they can hurl out there to make the masses think our government is trying to control their lives...it seems as if nothing ever will get done.
I'd like to think that, at some point, someone with some common sense is just going to go ahead and pass some concrete laws dealing with climate change regardless of the inevitable objections. But, we all know those laws will head straight to the Supreme Court and perhaps only about half will survive. It is very frustrating.
I understand and completely agree. Regardless of one’s perception of reality, common sense seems to be in woefully short supply these days.
Sadly, it’s happened before with dreadful results.
My son, who is a very bright person, swears by FOX and is unshakable. It’s easier to believe in simple garbage than to think.
Intelligence too frequently has no relation to common sense. No matter the reality, many people will seek confirmation of their preconceived beliefs. Hence, Fox News.
I teach biology at a major university. There are so many aspects of biological science that students (and society) push back on because of their feelings and beliefs. Evolution is a big one, and one might think that a refusal to believe in evolution doesn’t matter. Well, mutations in a virus and how well it transmits matter. Climate change matters if organisms can’t evolve to live in a warming climate. Of course, if one doesn’t believe in Covid-19 I guess its mutations in it are irrelevant. I resent being ruled by superstitions and beliefs based on nothing. Evidence matters.
Also, just because an individual was able to make tons of money in crypto does not automatically make them an expert in anything else.
Why are we so afraid of listening to people who actually know what they’re talking about?
They are points, and thanks for being a professor!
As a 'soon to be 70yo' female "child of the 60's" with 2 stubborn, grown daughters, might I respond from my perspective to your last question in one word: Fear. Of the unknown, of the inability to find absolute answers or resolution to that one emotion.
Good point
In the 1970s, I attended a major church-affiliated university. During our biology class one day when we were briefly discussing hermaphrodites, a fellow student spoke up to tell us all that the only thing worse than philosophy was science! And, with that statement, he slammed shut his book and marched out of the room. All I could say was "Oh." I really didn't know what to make of it, and I'm still stumped. But, the moment has stayed with me.
It would be interesting to know what that person thinks today and what his"philosophy"is now . I'd say he was struggling to find his own truth
As an aside, crypto is a Ponzi scheme. Ponzi schemes either collapse or are caught as frauds. They do not go on forever.
The Dutch Tulip craze of 1637 which at least led to the Keukenhof Gardens was a primary example of this.
I don’t know if the recent drop in crypto is the end of this Ponzi craze, but it will come.
Excellent bit. This is the kind of stuff I wish I could read every morning. Tyson's powerful statements that science is "a process of querying nature" and that it is the objectivity of science that leads to the discovery of truth, hints that sometimes people don't want to recognize that the questions change - the "querying nature" - which can clarify what is true. Seems that it causes too much discomfort for people who crave a black and white, unchanging, solid ground only.
Queries evolve and new proofs are presented all the time. (For instance, 16th and 17th c. astronomers Copernicus and Galileo argued and proved heliocentrism; until then, the Church enforced through the torture of the Inquisition, that geocentrism was known fact). As Tyson says, it's the unemotional objectivity of science that will lead to the truth. We just have to develop our sea legs and enjoy the ride.
Improvements in technology allow us to test our queries. As our abilities to test, observe, and analyze improve, our questions about how things work will uncover things people even 10 years ago couldn’t do.
It is exciting to think of and imagine what the future may bring.
I love how your interpretation of “science as a process of querying nature” lands with developing our sea legs and enjoying the ride! What a ride it has been so far!
Very well put
There is science, there are facts, and there are people who think they know better than anyone else. Sadly, many of the leaders of our country fall in the third category because if they admit the truth of the first two, they would not be as "powerful" as they think they are. There is an old saying "if you can't dazzle them with your brilliance, baffle them with your BS". That seems to be the plan of many currently in government and we will all pay the price if we don't vote them out.
Also they're not as powerful as they want to be!
Interesting and accurate assessment, as always. The next steps here, as I see it, are to address the psychological element. Denial is a defense mechanism employed when someone does not want to face reality. The climate crisis is an existential threat that is too profound for many people to confront. It’s easier to deny it. Also, while the problem is getting worse rapidly and exponentially, compared to the average term of a human life, it can seem like the consequences may arise in the distant future (as opposed to the truth that they are manifesting now). It’s human nature to put off issues until there is an immediate and urgent need to resolve them. Another factor is that the average person is relatively powerless in affecting real reversal of climate change. So it would take sustained, massive pressure from people petitioning their governments to take action. I don’t have any concrete answers here, but it seems to me we have to change the hearts and minds of people en masse first and then organize.
I agree, and maybe working on changing the minds of people while organizing? It’s a long and hard process to change the hearts and minds of people for sure, and it is critical. When breaking down seemingly insurmountable psychological obstacles, focusing on the baby steps helps.
Joanie, you’re spot on, and I love your optimistic outlook.
I agree--unfortunately it will take a crisis for some to wake up
I think you’re right, Nancy. My concern is the threshold for what constitutes a “crisis” to world leaders may be quite high. And the delay in taking action will result in irreversible damage — with the cost being the lives of many humans and animals.
I agree with you!!! I love being a Democrat but I do think just a Democrats drag their feet!!! I don't know what's worse anymore the Republicans with all their lies or the Democrats who do nothing!!
The Republicans. The Republicans with all their lies are worse. 😆 I definitely hear you though and share that frustration sometimes.
You're absolutely correct!! It just seems like Trump is nipping at our heels---and time is running out!!!! The thought that Republicans will take over the Senate in the house is almost more than I can bear!! I know I'm putting that pretty strongly!! I'm 78 and I won't be here for the Long haul if they do take over but I do fear for those who have to live with the results for years to come if the Republicans win!!!
I mean, I agree, Nancy. Whenever I worry out loud to my best friend about the threat of losing our democracy, he matter-of-factly states some variation of, "I'm not worried. If the Republicans destroy our democratic institutions and turn the country into a fascist dictatorship, then we'll have a revolution." He means it as a tongue-in-cheek joke (and the deadpan delivery is funny), yet there is some truth to it. Whenever one party "over-reaches," there is push back. Of course, the concern is that the push back usually comes in the form of voting out the overreaching party -- something that may not be available to Americans if the election system is tampered with and voters are entirely disenfranchised. However, we have the ability to take to the streets. And if the United States is turned into a police state in response to those protests, then there will be a horrific revolution to be sure, because Americans across the political spectrum would not tolerate that for too long. So, carrying this scenario to it's logical end, even if we lost one form of democracy, it would not be long (maybe a generation or two) before we'd return to some kind of democratic republic. Or at least, that's what I like to believe.
"Science is a systemic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe."
"Alternative Facts", are unrealism, nonsense, delusions, fallacies, and untruths.
Too many deniers are helping destroy the democracy our founding fathers fought so hard to establish..
The the last line in your piece, " If you don't see that, we're all in trouble". Neil DeGrasse Tyson is correct, and I hope Americans will see what is happening before it's too late.🙏
You are exactly correct in what you are saying!!
Hi Nancy, hope you are doing well!!!🌹 Have good weekend!!!😊💗🙏
Thank you 💖😊 for your well wishes,!!!!! You also have a great weekend talk to you later
I had these same thoughts ( expressed in your essay) when I saw this movie. Does art mimic life or life mimic art? Some people reject, deny, fear facts. Others are open , accepting and reactive. It seems today this is true in every single facet of life. Trying to understand human behavior is a never ending roller coaster ride. Have a great day!
Hi Ari 😃It’s almost Fri-YAY😃
I love the title of today’s newsletter: If everyone denies the facts, are they still facts?
Yes they are still facts because facts are supported with objective evidence and fact checking😃
In my world (science/ research and development), facts are supported with data through studies, observations and validations. Facts are established with justification.
Also, in science there are hypothesis and hypothesis testing.
A theory or an assumption is called hypothesis and this is the starting point for further investigation.
Hypotheses are tested through statistics and from the outcome of the results, the conclusion of the hypothesis is rejected or fail to reject.
Facts matter😃😃😃
Have a nice day, Ari😃
I just realized that I misunderstood the question!!! Thank you for putting it in such a way that I was able to get to the gist of the question ⁉️ the truth never changes
Yes, Sandra made it very succinct. Classroom style. She’s just like that! 😀
Loved those educational points, but I’m not letting you skip to “FRI-YAY.” Where’s our “HAPPY THURS-YAY?”😂
Thanks 🙏🏽 Happy Thursday-YAY😃😂🤣😂🤣😂. Ok, what about Happy Fri-YAY eve?😂🤣😂🤣😂
I’ll take them all! I look forward to “HAPPY WHATEVER DAY,” and felt cheated today: “OH, NO SHE DIDN’T!” Well, thank you, ma’am! Be well, Ms O.
Oh Diva, you made me smile!!!😁
😂🤣😂🤣🤣 You too! Cheers👍🏽
My two favorites: Ari Melber and Neil DeGrasse Tyson. I could listen to them both all day❤️❤️❤️
I can’t imagine how not sharing reality portends for humans and the planet they inhabit. Vigorous disagreements about what to do regarding this shared reality is fair game in my opinion. Facts that are empirically based are supposed to be modified as new information occurs; that is proof of science working. Science is not the answer for everything but it supports epistemology rather than magical thinking. I think that’s what Tyson was saying. For me the hunger that many people have to believe alternative reality is worthy of notice and support. I appreciate that existential hunger. I just feel that hunger is being exploited and supplanted with autocratic expansion. That sounds so sinister to me. I appreciate how you provide information without subjugation
Yes! The facts are the facts! Sadly people would rather believe someone they like rather than check into what they are saying. Believe you me, Mr. Melber, survivors all over this country know what is fact and what is not (our trauma has given us a heightened sense of discerning the truth from a lie)! We would love to take a megaphone and scream the facts to the top of our lungs until those who need to believe them, believes them!
It's beyond bizarre. I reflect back on growing up in what seems like a totally different world. Empirical observation bolstered by scientific trial is the ONLY acceptable way to form a belief system. Once that is called into question, you enter the world of make believe and/or denial of concrete evidence. The question is, "Why has this been forsaken by so many people?" Facts are based on repeatable and observable methodology. There are no "alternative facts." There is only the pathologic state of delusion for which we will pay dearly.
Objective truth is essential to a functioning, enlightened society. The monopoly of truth is what caused the Dark Ages. Mass communication; ie., movable type helped us out of the darkness. Now, mass communication is threatening society by spreading none truths. Reasonable regulation, such as modifying immunity for social platforms must be implemented before it destroys us!
We seem to live in an upside down world what was truth is no longer truth, science has been here to help and guide us, it seems some of us would perfer to believe we know everything, which we do not, we open ourselves to have faith, trust and learning.
On this journey call life, we learn new things everything day, when we go to our doctor if we have a medical issue we have faith and trust the he will do whatever he can to make it better. Science , medicine etc., are here to help us learn and understand old and new things. It is sad when we close ourselves off from learning, does not matter what age we are we should not close ourselves off the world is here to be explored. Great article as usual. Thank you😊👍
When I was in the 4th grade (I'm 63 now, so it's been a while, but I remember this as if I learned it yesterday) we were given this definition of science: "Science is an organized body of knowledge that helps us understand the past so we can create and/or predict the future." Outside of the definition, our teacher also taught us that things change. For example, polio wasn't always a thing. AIDS, Ebola, a round Earth, climate change. . .who knew?!
I am amazed by people who won't see what is right in front of them. Shrinking glaciers, massive forest fires, and how many tornadoes in Mississippi already this year?! On the other hand, they believe pedophile rings exist in the basement of Papa John's and that elections were stolen - all with absolutely zero evidence.
On the other hand, I do not believe in God. I love the "idea" of a God, but I don't believe such a thing exists anymore than does the tooth fairy or the Easter Bunny. And, I don't believe it because I don't see any evidence of it. I'm not one to take things at face value or to believe something just because I'm told it's true. People have given up trying to tell me the evidence is staring me in the face...it's right there in front of me if I'd only look!
I wholeheartedly believe in Science. I can see it, hear it, smell it, taste it, and hold it in my hands. So, while it's easy for me to be frustrated with "those stupid people" who don't believe in Science, I know a lot of people who are equally as frustrated with me. Every day I wonder what is the solution.
Your short discussion about believing or not believing in science at the end there is inappropriate since science is not an object of faith. It’s a process by which the curious attempt to replicate the behaviors of an observed thing to learn what makes it what it appears to be as opposed to something else.
Inappropriate?! I'm not so sure it's up to you to decide whether my post on someone else's site is inappropriate. Rather full of yourself, aren't you?
I don’t know where to post this, but I need to be heard: You have spent time talking about Student Loan debt…what about someone approaching 75 who went back to school at 55 and finished BA, Masters and Teaching Credential. Taught pre-k special Ed for 15 years… What about my $70000 in Student Loans???
Teachers work so hard to teach our children, they should have first priority in canceling student debt..