Bogus "science" - Fodder for journalists having zero scientific acumen

I have been following the ongoing "deflategate" scandal with rapt attention.  Don't expect me to tell you whether or not Tom Brady is a cheat.  I don't know and that's not the subject of this thread.  But something which has struck me throughout is the virtually uniform inability of members of the sports press to understand the underlying science.  It's so bad many of them make reference to the "weight" of the football when intending to refer to pressure.  They do not even understand the difference between "pounds" and "pounds per square inch".

Far too many members of the American press corps, so-called "journalists", are woefully unaware of even the most rudimentary scientific concepts.  I'm not talking university-level stuff here.  I'm thinking, instead, of scientific concepts taught in high school chemistry and physics classes, and in some school systems likely even earlier than that.  It is unbelievable how little basic science most journalists know or understand.

Why discuss this?  It's because these same journalists are the ones pushing hard on the man-caused global warming meme.  They spread such fallacious "scientific" thinking wherever and whenever they can.  And they are careful to shield the American public from persons and findings which disagree with the meme they champion.  Such contrary information is vigorously edited out of anything they write or publish..

But, you would counter, journalists are relying on recognized and respected scientific publications and sources as they go about their work.  They pick and choose information from only the finest scientific journals, then report what they find in those sources.  They do not themselves have reason to be scientists or to possess sound scientific judgement.  They have no need to know when something does not pass the scientific "smell test".  They don't even need to know enough science to be able to ask intelligent questions of their "experts".

With that thought in mind, if that be your view, know I disagree.  Journalists do need a rudimentary understanding of scientific topics and concepts in order intelligently to write about them.  They need to be able to ferret out bogus sources in order not to promulgate bogus "science".  What bogus sources?, you might ask.  I have no examples for you right now in the field of environmental science, though I'm certain many exist.  But in a related sense, this article brings to light copious "bought and paid for" bogus sources in the field of medical science.

Regardless the scientific field, journalists must be able to ferret...

Bottom line, when you hear a news report citing this or that infallible source as providing still more evidence of man-caused global warming, be suspicious.  Be very suspicious. 

Views: 332

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jim Litwinowicz on January 28, 2015 at 8:13am

Good article as too many reporters just regurgitate what they are fed.  Same can be said of foundations, charities, trusts and other fake fronts that funnel money around.  See my thread on how Russian oil companies are funding the antis.

Permalink Reply by Barry D on January 28, 2015 at 9:38am

Frank,

I recently posted a thread related to this issue.

Many people in the media who report the "supposed" negative aspects of shale development do not base their reporting on science. Instead they depend on the propaganda presented by the anti shale and anti oil and gas folks.

These "journalists" rarely do much research of these issues, including speaking with industry people. In specific the issue of hydraulic fracturing. The anti fracing people have made numerous claims of environmental doom to be expected from the use of the process. Many "journalists have been compliant and just parrot these (false) claims. It would not have taken much research for them to discover that the claims were false.

Face it, most journalists (I use that term losely) are lazy. Most of them are just looking for the most sensational issue to write about; and which will catapult their careers. For many of them facts get in the way and are to be avoided.

Another point: The recent predictions of impending doom from the recent snow storm on the east coast fizzled. The weathermen/women got it wrong. Their predictions were based on computer models. These are similar computer models used to predict the ravages of "global warming". There is very little science at all.

But a good sensational story is what these folks were looking for. So instead of checking on the science of weather they went with the false computer models.

We all must be careful with media reports. Check if the report is sourced (to a reputable source) or peer reviewed. Most reports about shale development containing dire claims of environmental doom are not based on science (check the sources), and they have not been peer reviewed.

Good post Frank   

Permalink Reply by Frank Walker on January 28, 2015 at 11:40am

Thanks.  I appreciate your thoughtful post as well.

What I saw with deflategate, though, is not laziness per se, at least not IMO.  Instead, I believe the eyes of most J-school grads simply glaze over when anything in the least scientific comes up.  It would be easy to label them "stupid".  That's likely not fair.  They are surely smart in some ways and within other fields of study and endeavor.  But most lack the capacity, even in the least, to comprehend scientific stuff.

Oftentimes that's not a problem.  But when they commence writing about drilling, fracking, man-made global warming, models (as you mentioned), and all the rest, their lack of any scientific acumen whatsoever leaves them in serious trouble.  Specifically, they are incapable of making their own independent judgments where scientific things are concerned.  They are completely hostage to the so-called "experts".  And if the "experts" happen to have an agenda or have ulterior motives, the J-school folks cannot identify such things.

I don't know why . . maybe it was the simplicity . . but it was much easier for me to spot this phenomenon as I closely followed the deflategate controversy (I'm a football fan).   As I listened to the journalists' questions it just sort of jumped out at me that they had, in most instances, no clue whatsoever what was going on.  They could not understand the basics of the (rather rudimentary) science involved.  Any thought such people could deal intelligently with the complex science surrounding drilling, fracking, global warming, and all the rest, is ludicrous.

Permalink Reply by Dan on January 28, 2015 at 2:59pm
"Far too many members of the American press corps, so-called "journalists", are woefully unaware of even the most rudimentary scientific concepts. I'm not talking university-level stuff here. I'm thinking, instead, of scientific concepts taught in high school chemistry and physics classes, and in some school systems likely even earlier than that."

Frank, you must be as old as me. I agree basic scientific knowledge is greatly lacking. Our education system started getting deflated since Reagen was in office. If you think science skills are weak now, wait a few years, It's not just art, music and physical education getting cut. Science is now on the chopping block also. Common Core................

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service