Skip to main content

Science March- A Stage for the Illegitimate

I've taken a lot of heat for my criticism of the planned Science Marches. Getting scientists to coalesce around anything is a rather monumental task akin to herding cats-- if cats were on Segways programmed to move randomly at high speed. Taking a united stand against the erosion of science funding and science standards is a good thing. 

But as I mentioned earlier, is this the best investment of our energy?  Maybe, and we should probably do it.  But let's do two other things:

1.  Stand up for science by making a commitment to durable, sustained efforts to fight science illiteracy and teach the wonders of our physical world. 

2.  We must label, criticize, ostracize and shame the pseudoscientific organizations that will co-opt the Science Marches nationwide. 


"Partner Organizations" contain some great organizations, but also a few that actively fight against science they find inconvenient or helpful in fundraising. 


A Mess on the Horizon

I can see this shaping up to be a stage for anti-Vaxers, March Against Monsanto, and creationists.  

They don't need a lab or peer-review to legitimize their science-- all they need is a stage and a camera and someone claiming the dangers of vaccines, glyphosate or GE corn has as much instant social media cred as Paul Offit or Norman Borlaug. 

There clearly will be an element of Trojan Horse, as these organizations are poised to potentially be a bigger presence than the scientists themselves. Remember, they have time and money, things scientists don't have. 

Already On the Inside

Organizations that espouse less-than-scientific positions have already permeated the organization. They are riding the credibility and visibility of this event to advance their own causes, 


Environmental Voter Project- Not sure what they actually do, they seem to be interested in climate, but have Annie Leonard from Greenpeace Executive Director featured as "Leader"




Popular posts from this blog

Scientific American Destroys Public Trust in Science

This is a sad epitaph, parting words to an old friend that is now gone, leaving in a puff of bitter betrayal. 
When I was a kid it was common for my mom to buy me a magazine if I was sick and home from school.  I didn't want MAD Magazine or comic books.  I preferred Scientific American
The once stalwart publication held a unique spot at the science-public interface, bringing us interesting and diverse stories of scientific interest, long before the internet made such content instantly accessible.  It was our trusted pipeline to the new edges of scientific discovery, from the mantle of the earth to the reaches of space, and every critter in between.
But like so much of our trusted traditional science media, Scientific American has traded its credibility for the glitz of post-truth non-scientific beliefs and the profits of clickbait.The problem is that when a trusted source publishes false information (or worse, when it hijacked by activists) it destroys trust in science, trust in s…

Chipotle's Ag-vertising to Fix their Anti-Ag Image

After years of anti-farmer rhetoric, disgusting anti-agriculture videos, and trashing farmer seed choice, Chipotle now seems to have found a love for the American farmer that is as warm and inviting as the gooey core of a steak burrito.  Their new "Cultivate the Future of Farming" campaign raises awareness of the hardship being experienced in agriculture, and then offers their thoughts and some seed grants in order to reverse it. 

But are they solving a problem that they were instrumental in creating? 

The crisis in agriculture is real, with farmers suffering from low prices, astronomical costs, and strangling regulation.  Farmer suicides are a barometer of the crisis.  Farms, from commodity crops to dairies, are going out of business daily. It is good to see a company raising awareness. 


From Chipotle's website- The "challenge is real" and "It's a hard living"-- and companies like Chipotle were central in creating those problems. 

However, Chipotle&#…

Mangling Reality and Targeting Scientists

Welcome to 2019, and one thing that remains constant is that scientists engaging the public will continue to be targeted for harassment and attempted reputation harm.  

The good news is that it is not working as well as it used to.  People are disgusted by their tactics, and only a handful of true-believers acknowledge their sites as credible. 

But for those on the fence I thought it might be nice to post how a website like SourceWatch uses a Wikipedia-mimic interface to spread false and/or misleading information about public scientists. 

Don't get me wrong, this is not crying victim.  I'm actually is screaming empowerment.  I spent the time to correct the record, something anyone can check.  Please look into their allegations and mine, and see who has it right. 

This is published by the Center for Media and Democracy.  Sadly, such pages actually threaten democracy by providing a forum for false information that makes evidence-based decisions in policy issues more challenging.  It…