The media can’t really help teaching nonsense about evolution and they will definitely resist correction, putting it down to some dark creationist plot. That is because so much of it supports their worldview. Which may well reflect on their worldview.
The bigger problem is overlooked. The basic philosophy of the people doing the science spins the story for them. We live in the age of the space detritus that was supposed to be an extraterrestrial lightsail and the conscious plants. And the talking apes. Oh yes, and the multiverse
It’s difficult for popular science media to be more interested in facts than the public or the science establishment is. If the Guardian readers would really rather hear about “toxic America,” the paper doesn’t need a science section.
Maybe the main thing to see here is that lots of people would love to falsify or tame quantum mechanics, the way they would like to falsify the Big Bang or fine-tuning and it won’t be their fault for lack of trying.
They are trying to interpret a world they don’t understand. They cling to Evolution (Darwinism) as TRUTH! because someone told them so. They are often not smart enough to see that any true story would be much more complex. Any interesting story is more complex too.
Of course, the price of cereal matters more to people on a limited budget than claims about polar bears, which they themselves never see outside a zoo. Most people in the world would not know that polar bears exist if no one told them so but they would know if food was getting scarce and cannot easily be fooled on the point. Good for him for understanding that.
Could legacy science media actually afford to get it right? Could they afford a serious discussion?
The National Academies of Science is wading into the longstanding mess over the validity of research findings. It doesn’t, of course, agree that there is a “crisis.” That said, the report also notes that the American public’s confidence in science hasn’t wavered at all in recent years, despite major news articles discussing the “crisis” in […]
Meanwhile, a critic, French-Canadian neuroscientist Jean-Francois Gariépy, who appears to be an alt right figure, has made his own vid, at The Public Space reviewing/attacking Shapiro’s interview with Meyer.
Most of the article is just establishment hand wringing. The main reason so many people don’t “trust science” is the same one that causes people not to trust used car dealers.
Say what you want about the brand new world of the raging Woke, lots of scientists are going to find out what the Dissent from Darwinism crowd know: People will say mean and crazy things about you if you go where the evidence you have personally seen leads. That’s the price of being honest these days.
Ridley discusses several other scare claims that did not survive scrutiny and notes that the best estimate is that insect species are dying out at rates simliar to mammals and birds (1 to 5 per cent per century): “A problem, but not Armageddon.”
It’s not that robots are really thinking up new things so much as that so much of what passes for news coverage doesn’t require much thought.
Top People need a multiverse. The rewards go to those who can conjure one. Hawking did his best within the boundaries of science and is to be commended for going no further. We have heard and will hear plenty from those who show no such qualms.
Airing Human Zoos: America’s Forgotten History of Scientific Racism is noteworthy in itself. For various reasons. legacy media have never been willing to take the legacy of explicitly Darwinian racism seriously, much as they feature disconnected and useless rants about racism.