Our fall show Sizzle hopes to start a discussion on science. Is it pure and unadulterated, or can it be sullied by money, politics, and ulterior motives? What is happening when science seems to disagree with itself on the same subject? What happens when we look to science for facts and get theories instead? How can interpretation of scientific results be so hotly debated?
The growing controversies of climate change, evolution vs creationism, and even food science indicate a credibility crisis for science. People are looking at the same sets of facts and seeing different, contradictory results, making it hard to know what is true. This is surprising for a field whose cornerstone is the scientific process--a process that supposedly finds repeatable, irrefutable answers. Instead, we seem to be finding questions. And the forefront of the questioners are politicians. Check out this interesting article on politics and climate change, specifically about the shifting positions of many Republican presidential hopefuls.
What do you think the shifting positions indicate about science? Do you think science is suffering a credibility crisis, or do you think it has always been up to debate? Share your thoughts in the comments.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Politics is a dirty game. Sadly, with enough $$, opponents of climate change can find (or make) scientists who agree with them. They then use their own evidence to combat what the majority of the scientific community sees as a no-brainer.
Post a Comment