{"id":5063,"date":"2009-10-30T00:27:21","date_gmt":"2009-10-30T06:27:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/wordpress-367309-1145705.cloudwaysapps.com\/?p=5063"},"modified":"2009-10-30T00:27:21","modified_gmt":"2009-10-30T06:27:21","slug":"scientists-behaving-badly","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/","title":{"rendered":"Scientists Behaving Badly"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Lab<\/a><\/p>\n

[social_buttons]<\/p>\n

The discussions following my two last posts about climate change opinion shifts<\/a> and about an anti-science coalition<\/a> have made it clear that one of the reasons people distrust science is that “Science” fails to speak with one voice. \u00a0There are definitely forces from the outside of Science that erode trust, but there are also internal issues.<\/p>\n

The problem is that Science will not ever “speak with one voice.” \u00a0Scientists often have different opinions about a given topic. \u00a0Often that simply represents a healthy part of the scientific process. \u00a0When I hear someone say, “scientists don’t even agree about this!” I want to say, “you don’t know many scientists, do you!” \u00a0We are trained to questions assumptions and scrutinize analytical methods. \u00a0We are taught how to spot artifacts and how to come up with alternate hypotheses. \u00a0Some scientists get a little aggressive about this (there is usually at least one\u00a0curmudgeon\u00a0in every department).<\/p>\n

There are definitely some topics that are so complex that it is impossible to be 100% sure about conclusions. \u00a0There are questions that are not amenable to running a controlled experiment. \u00a0These are all factors that make a topic like climate change so controversial. \u00a0These are legitimate reasons for the lack of a single “answer from science.”<\/p>\n

All the above said, there are plenty of examples of scientific disagreements that arise from what can only, honestly be called\u00a0bad scienc<\/strong>e.<\/strong> Doing science well is non-trivial. \u00a0It requires a good deal of mental rigor and comprehensive information acquisition. \u00a0If we scientists are honest we all have to admit that we can fall short of the ideal “scientific method” at times. \u00a0Trust in “Science” ultimately means trusting “Scientists” and thats sometimes where the trouble starts. \u00a0There are 5 main ways that I can think of that scientsts can “behave badly.” \u00a0Maybe you can add some more.
\n<\/p>\n

Drive-by Science<\/h2>\n

Many fields of science are moving so fast today that it is even difficult to keep up with your own area, let alone others. \u00a0That is why it bothers me to see scientists share “scientific” opinions about topics they might not really understand. \u00a0Its not that a smart scientist can’t do the scholarship to understand another field – they can and do, but not all of them. \u00a0 Evolution<\/a> is a frequent problem here. \u00a0Someone will post a list of scientists that say they don’t buy into Darwinian Evolution and it will be populated with a bunch of non-biologists. \u00a0The critical sphere for the current evolution discussion is deep into molecular genetics. \u00a0To keep up with the pace of knowledge in that area is a daunting task. \u00a0To flip that illustration upside down, I was at a plant molecular genetics conference a year ago struggling to understand the cutting-edge presentations. \u00a0I was there to talk about the issue of climate change and how these scientists could contribute to both greenhouse gas reductions in ag and to helping crops adjust to coming climate changes. \u00a0At the end I was asked to be on a panel asked to make summary statements about the conference. \u00a0I was totally impressed with what these scientists were doing, but I felt the need to chide them on a “drive-by.” \u00a0Several speakers made comments that were negative about the chemicals used in agriculture which would be fine if they knew what they were talking about. \u00a0But it was obvious that they were just sharing the outdated image of crop protection chemicals that is held by the population as a whole. \u00a0There are actually very few scientists in other fields that are up-to-speed about pesticide safety, but there are a great many who feel free to make a “drive-by” comment on the issue.<\/p>\n

Agenda Science<\/h2>\n

I read a paper this week where researchers planted virus resistant squash and regular squash. \u00a0They observed that the beetles in the field favored feeding on the much healthier plants (smart beetles!). \u00a0The beetles spread a bacterial disease and so there was more of that disease on the virus resistant plants. \u00a0Their conclusion was that the GM crop had enhanced susceptibility to the bacteria. \u00a0You can be sure that this assertion will find its way into the anti-GMO myth network without the needed perspective. \u00a0 The classic case for Agenda Science is Dr. Arpad Pusztain who genetically modified a potato with a lectin from the Snowdrop flower (a known toxin) and then fed them to rats. He said this demonstrated that GMOs could be dangerous. Dr. Pusztain became a hero to anti GMO activists, but he certainly didn’t contribute to science with this experiment which simply demonstrated that if you do something obviously unwise, you end up doing something obviously unwise.<\/p>\n

Non-contextual Science<\/h2>\n

A classic example here is a list of the “Ten Riskiest Foods…” based on food\u00a0poisoning\u00a0incidents by crop put out by the Center for Science in the Public Interest. \u00a0There is a blog that is widely read in the fresh produce community called the\u00a0Perishable Pundit<\/a> where Jim Prevor does an excellent job of critiquing the non-contextual science of that CSPI report which was uncritically picked up in the popular news<\/a>. \u00a0Highlights include the fact that the list is not at all corrected for per capita consumption so something like oysters that are not widely consumed but often contaminated are lower than leafy greens or eggs that are consumed on a large scale. \u00a0Potatoes are #5 in the list even though food safety incidents with potatoes come from other ingredients in improperly stored potato salad. \u00a0This is just irresponsible pseudo-science. \u00a0Many somewhat scientific publications talk about the total pounds of pesticides applied to a crop or within a region and do so in the framework of risks. \u00a0Since different pesticides differ in toxicity or other attributes by several orders of magnitude, this is essentially meaningless information. \u00a0There was a white paper<\/a> published by Doug Gurian-Sherman of the Union of Concerned Scientists supposedly showing that GMO crops did not lead to any real gains in yield. \u00a0What Doug used was data from academic researchers. \u00a0Commercial experience has been quite different and there have also been major geographic shifts in corn planting that have to be considered. \u00a0This is also a prime example of Agenda Science and Cherry-picking science.<\/p>\n

Cherry-picking Science<\/h2>\n

There is a recent case<\/a> where a researcher who wanted to make the case that there has been a global cooling trend chose 1998 as the starting point for “recent.” \u00a01998 was a very hot year so this made the trend look negative. \u00a0If the starting point was chosen a few years earlier, the “cooling trend”\u00a0disappears. \u00a0Commercial entities are always tempted to only show the better results, but academics can end up doing it to support a particular theory that needs support to continue getting grants. \u00a0Lots of games can be played<\/a> with statistics. None of this is good science.<\/p>\n

Orthodoxy Science<\/h2>\n

Most scientists do their work and interact with their colleagues and everyone gets along fine even if there are disagreements. \u00a0Unfortunately, certain topics have become very emotional and there can be a tendency to lose patience with scientists who are significant outliers from the consensus. \u00a0The classic example is Evolution vs\u00a0Intelligent\u00a0design. \u00a0This ends up in an argument about what is really science and what is not. \u00a0I won’t try to settle it here (as if I could), but there have been times when the majority fell into the trap of letting the outlier achieve victim status and generate a degree of\u00a0notoriety\u00a0that isn’t helpful. \u00a0There are also famous cases where a minority opinion eventually prevailed. \u00a0Continental\u00a0drift seemed too far fetched at first, but now it is well established. \u00a0A universe with a finite life was once unimaginable, but now the 15 billion year estimate is mainstream. \u00a0I \u00a0certainly don’t claim that this sort of transition will happen in this case of intelligent design or climate change, but still, patience is helpful and its always alright to simply say, “ok, show me data.”<\/p>\n

For climate change the implications of whether this is real or not are so huge that it is hard not to get emotional about it. \u00a0I think both sides need to acknowledge the stakes and see if there are civilized ways to proceed. \u00a0It may be too late; however, because the broader population is getting so polarized on the subject. \u00a0I think we should worry less about the debate about “if” and “why” and focus more on devising strategies that would simultaneously address other issues about which there is no\u00a0controversy\u00a0– things like security issues and the extremist education and armament machine funded by our oil addiction.<\/p>\n

So, I’ve put out a challenge on the “anti-science” side and now one on the internal science side. \u00a0Both contribute to the declining trust that society has for the science that has done so much to improve our lives and which is so critical for our future. \u00a0I’m still looking for solutions<\/p>\n

Lab coats image from Plutor<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

You are welcome to comment on this site or to email me at feedback.sdsavage@gmail.com<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

[social_buttons] The discussions following my two last posts about climate change opinion shifts and about an anti-science coalition have made it clear that one of the reasons people distrust science [ … ]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":110,"featured_media":5064,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[21,7],"tags":[4074,133,4086,80,8513],"yoast_head":"\nScientists Behaving Badly • Sustainablog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Scientists Behaving Badly • Sustainablog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"[social_buttons] The discussions following my two last posts about climate change opinion shifts and about an anti-science coalition have made it clear that one of the reasons people distrust science [ … ]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Sustainablog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-10-30T06:27:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Steve Savage\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Steve Savage\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Steve Savage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#\/schema\/person\/94b328be4b4ff77660bf858045245fe0\"},\"headline\":\"Scientists Behaving Badly\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-30T06:27:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2009-10-30T06:27:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/\"},\"wordCount\":1508,\"commentCount\":9,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Anti-Science\",\"Climate change\",\"Genetic Engineering\",\"global warming\",\"Science\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Science\",\"Technology\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/\",\"name\":\"Scientists Behaving Badly • Sustainablog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-30T06:27:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2009-10-30T06:27:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Scientists Behaving Badly\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/\",\"name\":\"Sustainablog\",\"description\":\"Since 2003, Sustainablog has been one of the pioneers of sustainability news online.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Sustainablog\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/07\/cropped-sblog-logo_3b.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/07\/cropped-sblog-logo_3b.jpg\",\"width\":200,\"height\":142,\"caption\":\"Sustainablog\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#\/schema\/person\/94b328be4b4ff77660bf858045245fe0\",\"name\":\"Steve Savage\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/175e6c22e30109e61f08983a074ad717?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/175e6c22e30109e61f08983a074ad717?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Steve Savage\"},\"description\":\"Born in Denver, now living near San Diego. Agricultural scientist for 30+ years with a Ph.D. in Plant Pathology. Have worked for Colorado State University, DuPont and Mycogen and for the last 13 years consulting for all sorts or companies, universities and grower groups. Experience in biological control, natural products, synthetic chemicals, genetics, GMOs and agronomic practices. Have given multiple invited talks on the interaction between agriculture and climate change (both ways)\",\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/importantmedia.org\/members\/sdsavage\/\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/author\/sdsavage\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Scientists Behaving Badly • Sustainablog","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Scientists Behaving Badly • Sustainablog","og_description":"[social_buttons] The discussions following my two last posts about climate change opinion shifts and about an anti-science coalition have made it clear that one of the reasons people distrust science [ … ]","og_url":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/","og_site_name":"Sustainablog","article_published_time":"2009-10-30T06:27:21+00:00","author":"Steve Savage","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Steve Savage","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/"},"author":{"name":"Steve Savage","@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#\/schema\/person\/94b328be4b4ff77660bf858045245fe0"},"headline":"Scientists Behaving Badly","datePublished":"2009-10-30T06:27:21+00:00","dateModified":"2009-10-30T06:27:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/"},"wordCount":1508,"commentCount":9,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#organization"},"keywords":["Anti-Science","Climate change","Genetic Engineering","global warming","Science"],"articleSection":["Science","Technology"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/","url":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/","name":"Scientists Behaving Badly • Sustainablog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-30T06:27:21+00:00","dateModified":"2009-10-30T06:27:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/scientists-behaving-badly\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Scientists Behaving Badly"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#website","url":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/","name":"Sustainablog","description":"Since 2003, Sustainablog has been one of the pioneers of sustainability news online.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#organization","name":"Sustainablog","url":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/07\/cropped-sblog-logo_3b.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/07\/cropped-sblog-logo_3b.jpg","width":200,"height":142,"caption":"Sustainablog"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#\/schema\/person\/94b328be4b4ff77660bf858045245fe0","name":"Steve Savage","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/175e6c22e30109e61f08983a074ad717?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/175e6c22e30109e61f08983a074ad717?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Steve Savage"},"description":"Born in Denver, now living near San Diego. Agricultural scientist for 30+ years with a Ph.D. in Plant Pathology. Have worked for Colorado State University, DuPont and Mycogen and for the last 13 years consulting for all sorts or companies, universities and grower groups. Experience in biological control, natural products, synthetic chemicals, genetics, GMOs and agronomic practices. Have given multiple invited talks on the interaction between agriculture and climate change (both ways)","sameAs":["http:\/\/importantmedia.org\/members\/sdsavage\/"],"url":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/articles\/author\/sdsavage\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5063"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/110"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5063"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5063\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-json\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5063"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5063"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sustainablog.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5063"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}