What You Believe about “Science Denial” May Be All Wrong

[Sanguine]

A recent meeting about the disconnect between scientific and public beliefs points to ways researchers can improve how they communicate with skeptics.

Feb 11, 2019
Kari Fischer

Recent headlines about measles outbreaks across the country, despite the availability of an effective vaccine, make it hard to escape the feeling that widespread rejection of science is on the rise. 

Whether it be climate change debates, vaccine fears, or skepticism of genetically engineered crops, the media is full of stories about those who distrust the conclusions or motivations of the scientific community. And yet, these contemporary hot-button issues are part of a centuries-old discord between science and the public—one that we, as scientists, still struggle to address.

In November 2018, Rutgers Global Health Institute and the New York Academy of Sciences hosted a conference entitled Science Denial: Lessons and Solutions, supported in part by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. Held at the academy’s downtown Manhattan conference center, the meeting brought together concerned scientists with journalists, public health leaders, communications scholars, and science historians to discuss the spread of scientific misinformation and identify meaningful ways to respond to it....

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/opinion--what-you-believe-about-science-denial-may-be-all-wrong-65448

Interesting.

[Smokin Joe]

Had it not been for the entire Anthropogenic Global Warming/"Climate Change" hoax, the promotion of mental illness as 'normal' and the attempts to make it mainstream in society, The Lysenkoistic nonsense of using food for fuel, and a host of other abuses of scientific sounding nonsense, perhaps science would have a prayer with folks who have common sense and who observe their surroundings.

Between the Communists at Universities and Colleges, the charlatan politicians promoting snake-oil cures for evils which either do not exist or that humanity cannot control (for fun and profit, lots of profit), and the patent hypocrisy of those proponents, perhaps real science would stand a chance.

Unfortunately, after those who are at best marginally scientists (regardless of degree) are done wrecking the credibility of scientists for their own $pecial Intere$t$, at some point a critical issue will become a killer because of the damage done to that credibility by the charlatans. Two generations of children, literature, and popular media are saturated with the Climate Change nonsense--a hideous abuse which will cost us all dearly.