A common and justified complaint from people at large is that they don’t know what to believe when presented with diametrically opposed arguments about science and technology. The proponents and opponents both tend to sound determined and often convincing; the trouble is that all too often neither they nor their “facts” agree. The problems comes up again and again with climate change, MMR vaccine, homeopathy, GM crops, nuclear power, “intelligent design” and the rest.

“Which side is more likely to understand the evidence? How do I judge between them”, moans the bewildered onlooker? ”Who is citing reliable evidence and who is making assertions? How I am supposed to know?”

Help is at hand. Sense about Science is “an independent charitable trust promoting good science and evidence in public debates”. They do so by encouraging respect for tested evidence and by urging scientists to engage actively with a wide range of groups, particularly when debates are controversial or difficult.

True to their word, they have recently published a guide to help with exactly that problem of not knowing what to believe. Only eight pages long, and with no long words, the pamphlet explains how scientists communicate with one another (and with the world at large) in a reliable manner through a procedure called “peer review”: getting experienced people to look at and criticise scientific reports and papers before they are published so that the data and arguments they contain are as reliable as possible, and the arguments and conclusions put forward are justified by the experimental results.

All too often we are assailed by media reports scarily claiming “a link” between this and that when the evidence shows nothing of the sort. Unremittingly we read of and hear pressure groups in pursuit of their various agendas making claims and statements on the basis of assertions repeated over and over again but without much firm basis in fact.

Now everybody can get the measure of these arguments for themselves. They need only download the leaflet from Sense about Science and ask the questions themselves: what is the evidence and where is it published? Has it been peer-reviewed?

The outcome cannot be absolutely guaranteed but will be a lot closer to reality than much of the nonsense currently spouted in furtherance of political and commercial objectives.

Source:

“I don’t know what to believe...” Making sense of science stories. Sense about Science (9.6.08) (http://www.senseaboutscience.org.uk/index.php/site/project/30)

<<<back