"If you cannot question it, it's not science. It's propaganda." – meme
ON WISCONSIN magazine, Spring 2020, published an article, "There's no war on Science among the American Public; an analysis of opinion polls over time shows that Americans across the political spectrum maintain high levels of confidence in scientists." The real question is, do we have a high level of confidence in polls? And 40 percent trust is nothing to brag about. Excerpt from the article:
"In the 2018 General Social Survey, about 40 percent of respondents reported a great deal of confidence in the leaders of scientific institutions, a number that has changed little since surveying began in 1973 . . .
"'We can say without a doubt that the vast majority of Americans have confidence in the scientific community,' says Dominique Brossard, senior report author . . "
QUITE A LEAP from "about 40 percent" [38-39?] to "vast majority," isn't it? One more excerpt:
"While Democrats reported higher confidence in scientists than Republicans did in 2018, members of both parties have reported similar, high levels of confidence over the past 45 years. Yet the research team did uncover a persistent, large gap between rural and suburban residents' confidence in science. About 30 percent of rural residents expressed confidence in scientists over the last 30 years, well below the 40 percent average . . "
The insinuation is that rural people are poorly educated, but on average I'd bet the farm that rural people are better educated than urban people. The main point in my rebuttal is that I'd bet another farm that polls today would show less trust in "science" than in 2018 which was before Fauci, the virus, and the World Health Organization's flip flops. Now there is true hard science and politicized "science."
WE BELIEVE IN SCIENCE, the "progressives" say, but they are in denial about a link between abortion and breast cancer (any veterinarian can tell you there's a link between miscarriage and mastitis). They are wrong on sex changes, and any other topic where science doesn't fit the slant, the spin, the narrative.
"Brossard's team began its investigation following the 2017 March for Science. The protest sprang out of concerns that the Trump administration would discount or suppress scientific information, and it appeared to mark an increase in the politicization of science. [So they admit it existed before Trump] The same poll revealed an uptick in confidence among Democrats in 2018, to about half of the population surveyed . . "
AGAIN, about half (was it 48-49?) is nothing to write home about. It would have been just as well for ON WISCONSIN to have said nothing about the alleged trust in the science "community." That community isn't monolithic.
"Americans reported that they trusted scientists more than they trusted many other institutions and professions, including journalism, judges, and Congress."
ON WISCONSIN is published by graduates of J-school. They are entitled to their opinion, but as we are often scolded, we are not entitled to our own facts. Yet their conclusion is:
"We can say without a doubt that the vast majority of Americans have confidence in the scientific community . . "
That's a non-sequiter. "Does not follow."
P.S. I don't even have time to get into mainstream medicine's aversion to alternative cheap drugs to treat covid-19. Studies have shown their effectiveness even as a prophylactic. But anyone who "questions" the Establishment is mocked and attacked.
PPS: I may have to go into more on this another day. Have a good one!© Curtis Dahlgren
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.