Resurrecting Democracy

What Happened to the Belief in Science?

What Happened to Belief in Science?

                        Robert A. Levine

America used to be the leading nation in scientific research, coming up with new discoveries and inventions that improved the lot of mankind and the nation’s economy. Scientific concepts were taught in the schools and the average American believed in the empirical principles that science had uncovered. Though the United States is still probably the leader in scientific productivity, its lead is slipping with less funding from the federal government for scientific research and China spending more. And many established scientific facts are no longer accepted by a significant percentage of the American population.

There are a number of rejections of scientific data by Americans that stand out, much of it instilled by propaganda from President Trump, who considers himself an expert on everything and refuses to concede that scientific information on global warming may be correct. It is hard to know whether Trump’s beliefs in this area are the result of pure ignorance or whether he is lying about the data to support the use of fossil fuels. Whatever the reason, his rejection of climate change as reality and his failure to take action on it will have a devastating effect on the planet and mankind’s future. Not only has he neglected to address the problem of global warming, his actions regarding the use of coal and oil, and spurning of renewable energy will only make the problem worse to the detriment of younger generations.

The anti-vaxxer movement which claims that vaccines are dangerous appears to be supported by Trump, though scientific evidence shows that vaccines are safe. Because large numbers of Americans are not letting their children be vaccinated because of fear of autism, herd immunity has not been successful in preventing an outbreak of measles which was previously thought to have been eliminated in America. Measles itself is potentially dangerous, with a percentage of those infected developing brain damage and even death. Those who believe in the danger associated with the measles vaccine are living in the dark ages, true as well for those who reject the polio vaccine. All the standard vaccinations should be mandated for all children or the parents fined for withholding preventive therapies that will provide safety for their children. Exceptions on the basis of religion should not be allowed.

The next area of scientific controversy is the safety of GMOs for human consumption. (genetically modified organisms) Grains that have been genetically modified to make them resistant to various pests, possibly climate changes and to increase yield are used in foods in the United States and considered safe. Over 90 percent of corn, soybeans and cotton grown in the U.S. has been genetically modified and is eaten regularly. But there are still individuals who refuse to accept the scientific data that GMOs present no threat to humans (or animals) and search for foods that are GMO free. The concern over GMO foods is even greater in Europe. Some of the same men and women who are anti-vaxxers are also against the consumption of foods that utilize GMOs and believe various conspiracy theories regarding science.

Another disagreement responsible for conflict is the teaching of evolution in the schools which is opposed by many fundamentalist Christians who believe that God created all creatures within the last ten thousand years. According to some of them, man and the dinosaurs walked on earth at the same time before the dinosaurs and other creatures died off. This has been thoroughly disproven by scientific evidence but they accept it on faith. They would either like creationism taught exclusively in the schools or together with evolution, allowing the students to decide which concept is true.

It is amazing that in this day and age there is so much conflict regarding citizens’ refusal to accept scientific truths, which does not bode well for future scientists and scientific advances coming from America. Scientific facts should be taught aggressively in the schools as the nation tries to increase the number of students who choose careers in the STEM fields or the teaching of STEM subjects. And instead of the federal government cutting down on funding for scientific research, it should be increased significantly, as it is seed money for the nation’s future. And of course, politicians who deny scientific facts should be removed from office.

Resurrecting Democracy

www.robertlevinebooks.com

The Wall and All

The Wall

            Robert A. Levine  11-27-18

 Trump is threatening a government shutdown if Congress does not provide him with money to build his wall at the border with Mexico. This is the same Donald Trump who promised that Mexico would pay for the wall so why is he making these demands on the U.S. Congress. With our huge national debt and yearly deficits, building this wall would be a waste of billions of dollars which would be useful in building and repairing America’s infrastructure which has been crumbling for years.

In addition, a wall would not be totally effective as it is low tech and could be scaled. There is also the task and cost of maintenance once the wall has been constructed. Using high tech mechanisms, the border could be made more secure at a much lower cost. Trump seems to be pushing the wall because of the optics that he believes would motivate his base. However, the use of electronic monitoring systems together with drones and increased border patrols would likely do a superior job to the much more expensive wall which also be time-consuming to build.

Trump’s idea of building a wall goes back to the Middle Ages when kings built walls to protect their castles and keep marauders out. I’m surprised he doesn’t want to add a moat to make it even more difficult to get in. After all, many of Trump’s ideas do come out of the Middle Ages, such as using torture on prisoners to extract intelligence. Next thing you know he’ll be bringing back the rack.

The way Trump admitted to treating women he desired- grabbing them by the p---y- is even further in the past in the era of cavemen. Perhaps he should have been featured on The Flintstones instead of The Apprentice as his behavior is much more in synch with the former. Of course, they didn’t have Twitter in those days so he might have had difficulty communicating with others.

 His trade policies may not come from the Middle Ages or primitive times, but they’re out of the past as well. And his denial of scientific data like global warming and the value of vaccinations are pre-Galileo. In fact, Trump might have been a decent king in the Middle Ages but as a modern president he’s a complete failure. Perhaps it’s good that he doesn’t like to read for if he read history, he’d be liable to come up with other foolish ideas that might have worked in past centuries but are of little utility today.

Closing down the government if he doesn’t get his way sounds like typical Trump. It will give him a chance to hop down to Florida and play some golf while Congress and government officials are stewing. He’ll show the country who is boss even if it damages the reputation of the United States and makes us look more and more like a banana republic. Come to think of it, maybe Trump likes bananas.

Resurrecting Democracy

www.robertlevinebooks.com

Science Denied

            Robert A. Levine   11-11-15

One of the foundations of Western civilization has been a belief in science and the ability to utilize new discoveries in practical ways to improve and extend human life. Yet currently, the citizens of many Western nations are rejecting scientific information and recommended responses as being valid, spurning behavior changes on the basis of this knowledge. Scientific data is being endorsed or denied in different nations because of long held biases, religious beliefs, economic incentives, and so forth. And evidence does not seem to make a difference. Two major areas of global importance where science has been disregarded are climate change and the safety of genetically modified crops (GMOs- genetically modified organisms).

Republican conservative politicians in the United States deny that climate change is real and doubt whether mankind could be responsible if global warming is indeed occurring. Because of this, they have refused to pass laws to address this critical issue. This is in spite of the fact that climate scientists have repeatedly shown that global warming is real and caused by human activity, particularly the burning of coal and oil which releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Methane and nitrous oxide are also “greenhouse” gases like carbon dioxide that trap the earth’s heat and result in the warming of the planet. Backed by the fossil fuel lobby and the Koch brothers, Republicans claim that controlling carbon emissions to cut down on carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would damage the American economy and that there is not enough evidence to warrant this action.

Fortunately, rational Americans like President Obama accept the veracity of global warming and his administration has taken steps to reduce greenhouse gases, in conjunction with China and Europe. The majority of Americans, including those who deny global warming, appear to believe that GMOs are not dangerous and are willing to eat foods containing ingredients from GMO crops. A significant minority, however, including environmentalists who want to stop global warming, are afraid of GMOs and refuse to ingest them, ignoring the scientific evidence of their safety.

For the most part, Europeans feel that global warming is a real threat and have taken steps to cut down on the production of greenhouse gases. (Interestingly, their testing for automobile emissions has not been as stringent as in the U. S, allowing Volkswagon and other automobile companies to game the system.) But Europeans are almost uniformly against GMOs, calling them “frankenfoods” and believing the lies and propaganda against them. This false information has been generated mainly by environmentalists in groups like Greenpeace. Seventeen countries have recently banned GMO cultivation on the basis of the popular belief that they are dangerous. Many farmers as well as scientists have argued against this ban, realizing that GMOs increase crop yields and are safe to eat. Instead, farmers have to use pesticides and chemicals that may leach into the local water supply to control insects and crop diseases to produce foods for European consumption.

This ban on GMO cultivation will check development in this promising area of biotech science in European universities and corporations. The Scientific Advisory Council of the European Academy of Science had previously warned that European countries were lagging other nations internationally in agricultural and biotech innovation and new technologies such as genetic research. This could have future economic ramifications for the European Union.

But even more importantly, African countries have followed the European lead in not cultivating crops that are genetically modified, concerned about potential side effects that are non-existent. There are worries that GMOs can produce sexual dysfunction or homosexuality, which is of course ridiculous. This means, however, that drought-resistant, insect-resistant, and disease-resistant crops will not be grown in sub-Saharan Africa, though these could enhance crop yields dramatically and provide foods that would alleviate hunger and famine, reducing the number of malnourished children.

A number of people in the U.S. and Europe (particularly those afraid of GMOs) are also resistant to having their children vaccinated, believing this increases the chances of autism or other developmental problems. Again, the scientific evidence has disproved this theory and vaccinations are necessary for the safety of all children. And there are other instances as well, where people disregard scientific evidence that should shape their beliefs, reinforced perhaps by what children are taught in some schools (creationism, intelligent design, and non-acceptance of evolution).

Science has provided data that clearly shows global warming is real, foods containing GMOs are safe, and vaccinations are safe and necessary. Yet many people choose to think otherwise, ignoring the evidence that is available and acting in unacceptable ways. And at times the leaders of democratic nations acquiesce and pass laws that are unreasonable in light of the scientific data, or refuse to pass other laws that are necessary. Citizens and legislators need to accept scientific evidence to guide their behavior, but obviously this is often disregarded. A problem for democracy and the world.

Resurrecting Democracy

www.robertlevinebooks.com

Image by Shutterstock