YES! I was just thinking about this the other day on how science advocates need to go on the offensive instead of dealing with the daily defensive gish gallops for which they often get mired.
While a better understanding of science and critical thinking by the general public is important I think a gap needs to be bridged where pseudoscience gets actively engaged.
I think we need to compile a list (If someone has not already) of Anti GMO promoters that show their industry links as well as how much they make from their non-GMO stance personally and from the products they sell. Sort of a most wanted poster project. When their minions cry "shill" I want to be able to link to a cite that shows how much they gain by their rhetoric. Well that and a frozen dead carp to beat them about the head but I usually refrain from that as it is not considered polite.
I understand your point but I always tell people to follow the science, not the money. It's just a vicious cycle of finger pointing to trot out their list of pay masters, because then it becomes a matter of who does the public believe more, and I don't think food/ag science wins out in the court of public perception.
I think it is far better to explain why a methodology is flawed, or the very premise that led to a study is flawed, or why some study's correlation doesn't actually work as causation. We're all just treading water until we get stronger science education in this country.
Until then, we can only really fight Food Hysterics to a tie.
YES! I was just thinking about this the other day on how science advocates need to go on the offensive instead of dealing with the daily defensive gish gallops for which they often get mired.
ReplyDeleteWhile a better understanding of science and critical thinking by the general public is important I think a gap needs to be bridged where pseudoscience gets actively engaged.
I think we need to compile a list (If someone has not already) of Anti GMO promoters that show their industry links as well as how much they make from their non-GMO stance personally and from the products they sell. Sort of a most wanted poster project. When their minions cry "shill" I want to be able to link to a cite that shows how much they gain by their rhetoric. Well that and a frozen dead carp to beat them about the head but I usually refrain from that as it is not considered polite.
ReplyDeleteI understand your point but I always tell people to follow the science, not the money. It's just a vicious cycle of finger pointing to trot out their list of pay masters, because then it becomes a matter of who does the public believe more, and I don't think food/ag science wins out in the court of public perception.
ReplyDeleteI think it is far better to explain why a methodology is flawed, or the very premise that led to a study is flawed, or why some study's correlation doesn't actually work as causation. We're all just treading water until we get stronger science education in this country.
Until then, we can only really fight Food Hysterics to a tie.