Friday, March 03, 2006
Science Awry
I am learning to love the Prometheus blog - a blog out of the University of Colorado on science and public policy. Yesterday, they posted a review of one chapter of a book called "Rising Above The Gathering Storm" and had this most interesting quote
Now, let's contemplate that for just a second. I want tax dollars to pay for me to research something. Therefore, it is in my interest, and the interest of my collegues to have the general public interested in the aspect of science that I want to research. In this way, the public will apply pressure to elected officials and bureacrats to send the money my way.
So, the key question for many a researcher is how to get the public interested in what they are interested in. One way to do that is the gross romanitcization and overstatement of what is being researched, which is common on shows like NOVA. Another, is the oldest and most tried and true political strategy in the 20th Century and following - tilt up a potential disaster and sell yourself as the solution to the pending problem. Science has become an essentially political undertaking.
That is certainly the thought that came to my mind when I read this headline.
'Consensus' is a word of politics, not science. Arriving at a consenus is a political process, not a scientific one. Of course, in a sense, there is a consenus of scientists that agree that f = ma (Newton) but they did not put there heads together an arrive at that consensus - the data demonstrated to them its truth and they were able to go generate more data to verify it.
But the consensus discussed in the linked article is a declaration by a body of some sort, a purely political action. No, in genuine science you do to "arrive" at a consensus, the data "drives you" to one.
My point - when considering headline, after headline, after headline on global warming, just remember, there is a lot of employment and a lot of money to be made by having it be "real." That is a force equally as powerful in arriving at a consensus as any other.
Related Tags: science, consensus, global warming, public funding
The focus is regrettably not on what S&T [ed: science and technology] can do for the U.S. public, but what the U.S. public can do for the S&T community.This is, needless to say, a reference to the fact that so much science, particularly university science, is funded by the government. This has the effect of rendering the average professor as a grant writer more than actual researcher.
Now, let's contemplate that for just a second. I want tax dollars to pay for me to research something. Therefore, it is in my interest, and the interest of my collegues to have the general public interested in the aspect of science that I want to research. In this way, the public will apply pressure to elected officials and bureacrats to send the money my way.
So, the key question for many a researcher is how to get the public interested in what they are interested in. One way to do that is the gross romanitcization and overstatement of what is being researched, which is common on shows like NOVA. Another, is the oldest and most tried and true political strategy in the 20th Century and following - tilt up a potential disaster and sell yourself as the solution to the pending problem. Science has become an essentially political undertaking.
That is certainly the thought that came to my mind when I read this headline.
'Consensus' is a word of politics, not science. Arriving at a consenus is a political process, not a scientific one. Of course, in a sense, there is a consenus of scientists that agree that f = ma (Newton) but they did not put there heads together an arrive at that consensus - the data demonstrated to them its truth and they were able to go generate more data to verify it.
But the consensus discussed in the linked article is a declaration by a body of some sort, a purely political action. No, in genuine science you do to "arrive" at a consensus, the data "drives you" to one.
My point - when considering headline, after headline, after headline on global warming, just remember, there is a lot of employment and a lot of money to be made by having it be "real." That is a force equally as powerful in arriving at a consensus as any other.
Related Tags: science, consensus, global warming, public funding
