"The War on Science"

   Running along the lines of the discussion we had with Professor Harris on Friday on the topic of the human search for patterns and acceptance, this month's issue of National Geographic contained an article entitled "The War on Science." It centered on why, in this day and age, human beings find a desire to question everything from the truth behind the moon landing to the side effects of vaccines (especially the claims that they can cause autism) despite loads of scientific evidence that proves otherwise.

   Science and facts have always been available to some human beings, but not all. The truths behind evidence and experimentation were usually left to those in their respective fields, but these days, everything is available through the Internet. This is by no means a bad thing; however, the issue with statistics is that they can be manipulated to appear as though they defend a certain thought or ideal and can therefore be misrepresented.

   With access to facts and numbers at everyone's fingertips, they are often used to defend whatever people feel most strongly about; not what is right, per se. Someone will seek out and latch onto the information that defends their core values and consider it a new foundation for their beliefs without considering the opposing viewpoint - which still leaves them a believer, not a scientist.

   Take, for example, the theory that the Earth is a globe. In this day and age, it is an irrefutable fact. It was proven in ancient times to be true. Yet still, in the nineteenth century, beliefs that the world was square or flat pervaded, making their way past fringe ideas into mainstream society. While this was considerably difficult to do by pony express, with the advancements of social media, it is far easier for this to happen in 2015.

   This is part of the reason why we hear theories such as those that 9/11 was an inside operation or that the moon landing was faked. The other portion would be because we search for patterns - as Professor Harris pointed out. "If subject A reacts to subject B, the same must be the case everywhere." This simple yet practically baseless argument is what drives a huge portion of modern dogma, which leaves everyone generally misinformed and undereducated. 

   There's also the thought that everyone simply wants to be accepted. The article discussed how people will not alter their ideas if those adjustments will insult the others in their "tribe" of believers, risking their expulsion.

   That being said, for the full, "scientific" explanation in the article, here it is:

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2015/03/science-doubters/achenbach-text

   If anything, this article should be an encouragement to see both sides of a story and attempt to put aside one's previous contentions lest one be wrong.