The War On Science: Why It Matters (part 3)

With apologies to international readers, this post is admittedly pretty U.S. specific.  Just carry on, please…   I’ll be back to more widely applicable brain stuff soon.   For those of you just tuning in, check out part 1 and part 2.

When I first mentioned this series to a group of acquaintances, one of them scoffed. “A war on science? In AMERICA? Pshaw. There’s always a fringe contingent against anything, and  Churches have been fighting science for centuries! You really think it matters NOW?”

Yes, yes I do.   And I think it should matter to you, too. (’cause I’m a busy body that way) 

I grew up in the heyday of the Apollo space program.  In 1969 I was four years old, and too young to understand the significance of that first moon walk, but I stayed up late to watch it on our flickering black and white TV anyway. My parent’s excitement and tension was infectious:  this was something very, very cool, and a little scary.  

Watching liftoffs, landings, moonwalks and splashdowns became dependable punctuation to my young life.  My father (as well the men who would become my stepfather and my father-in-law) worked on the Apollo missions, as did so many others in my parent’s generation.

And we won the space race.

The sense of accomplishment, amazement and pride was like nothing I’ve experienced in my adult life.   Thinking back, I think watching those rockets kept the pride in our country alive through the Civil Rights conflicts, Vietnam, and Watergate.  It certainly helped keep our economy going, and contributed to breakthroughs in medicine, household goods, and all of these nifty gadgets we rely on daily now.

But when the competition from the USSR collapsed, we got lazy, science wise.  We started resting on our laurels, too secure in our success, even as other countries advanced in areas of technology. We started buying their gadgets by the truckload, and the  Space Program became almost a curiosity. We didn’t really understand the missions, the tests, or the benefits anymore, and we started questioning the cost - both financial and human.  

The loss of Challenger struck hard - we’d been prepared for disasters during the Apollo program, but the Shuttle flights had become routine, their success taken for granted.   Then, suddenly, it was anything but routine and success.   When the loss of Columbia followed,  9-11 was still fresh in our minds, and it was too much.  Too many symbols of American success had fallen in flame, too many of our heroes were being sacrificed.  

We faltered in our resolve as a nation, and  funding for science stopped being a political priority.  As the ethical challenges presented by science mounted, support for science became a more of political liability.  A subtle but persistent  anti-science sentiment seemed to settle over the administration in Washington. 

Education, Politics and Funding

In 2007, G.W. Bush (who had always stressed education as a priority ) shocked the science and education communities by saying Intelligent Design should be taught alongside Evolution.  If nothing else, it reveals the success of the Creationist movement in their efforts to muddy the waters when it comes to science.

And it’s in this atmosphere that NASA’s programs have been gutted so  badly  that we will soon have to hitch a ride with Russia to continue work on the Space Station.  Research on climate change  has been squashed, denied, discouraged, and distorted by the current administration.   Evidence on everything from the (in)effectiveness of teaching teenage abstinence to the need for shoring up flood levees has seemingly been ignored.   Funding for science and medical research barely keeps up with inflation during a time when we’re facing new challenges in our environment, energy needs, and health care; requests for research grants from NIH are way up and the potential for public benefit is astounding, but the current funding  barely keeps up with inflation. 

According to 2006 PISA test scores,  US students are  ranked 17th in science among 30 developed nations.  In math, American students fall even lower -  24th.    Those statistics suggest a frightening future, when it comes to our ability to remain competitive in the global marketplace.    In spite of pledges from Washington to stress education in the sciences, the funding just hasn’t materialized - education funding has been cut across the board. And the public has lost so much faith in the school systems that many are opting for home schooling - and means the quality of education and approach to science is less standardized than ever. 

Health Impact

The growing public distrust in science and medicine is a potential threat to public health.  Although multiple studies show no link to autism (and no studies suggest there is a link) growing numbers of parents are refusing to vaccinate their children from fears of the possibility.  The impact is already being felt: measles cases in the US are  at their highest point in 12 years,  and whooping cough is the highest in 40 years.  

Surprising numbers of people distrust and reject the medical and mental health establishment as a whole.  I’ve  been astounded at the number people I’ve heard  casually advise others against seeking or maintaining treatment for serious medical and mental health issues, declaring that the medical establishment is nothing but “pill pushers” - Scientology

Questioning the accepted standards and treatment is an important part of a scientific approach - but to do it effectively, we have to first really understand  and trust the methodology.   Without a solid grounding in science, it’s difficult to make truly informed decisions on issues like whether or not to vaccinate children,  or take an anti-depressant.

Then There’s That Evolution Thing…

Whatever we believe about the origins of the universe, rejecting evolution (or just failing to teach it effectively) creates a serious gap in understanding our planet, and our impact on the environment.  Without a basic grasp of evolutionary theory, it’s difficult to understand things like the importance of protecting endangered species. (Hint:  it isn’t just about saving someone’s favorite pet lizard, but protecting entire ecosystems, and *not* introducing changes that force evolutionary process to speed up.)

Without an understanding of evolution, we can’t fully  understand the way diseases evolve and mutate, and  we can’t fully understand the impact of the rapidly expanding human population. 

Without an understanding of the other sciences (which often  contradict Creationist views) we can’t understand climate change, how much our emissions may or may not change the weather patterns, what the magnetic poles are doing, or how the sea level changes and affects us.

As I’ve tried to show, the rejection of science doesn’t have to be on a large scale to impact our future.   Small changes in attitude affect the way projects are prioritized and funded, the way our children learn, the way other countries perceive our success.  

Public attitude towards science *matters* in the US, and we can’t afford to let the public relations war on science continue. It’s affecting our politics, our education, our pride, our economy,  our health, our climate and our future. 

And that’s why it matters.

MindTweak: “I never thought I would see the day when the world’s richest, most powerful, most accomplished spacefaring nation would have to buy tickets from Russia to get up to our station. I think that’s a bummer.”                                                                                   - John Glenn