Perhaps this is understandable, but I also believe it is dangerous just to walk away and dismiss science deniers as irrational (even if they are.) Even worse is to react to their hectoring on the question of whether there is '100 percent consensus' on global warming, or whether we're 'certain' that vaccines don't cause autism, by blustering about 'proof,' which only gives aid and comfort to one of the most damaging myths about science.īut we really can't afford to do this anymore, nor can we afford to defend science simply by talking about its successes.

In the empirical realm, scientists often choose to respond by presenting their evidence, then get upset and refuse to engage more when their data aren't accepted or their integrity is questioned. In this 'post-truth' era-with headlines like ' Why Facts Don't Change Our Minds'-it is an open question how to convince people who reject evidence, not just in science, but also on a host of other factual matters. To make matters worse, scientists (and others who care about it) have not really found an effective way of fighting back against science denial. And, in one of the most incredible developments of my lifetime, the Flat Earth movement is on the rise. Senate-due mainly to partisan politicians who routinely confuse climate and weather-even as scientists tell us that we have only until 2030 to cut worldwide carbon emissions by half, then drop them to zero by 2050. Climate change legislation stalled in the U.S.

More than seven hundred cases of measles across 22 states in the U.S., largely due to vaccine deniers. Every day in the media we see once-unthinkable science headlines.

I am a flat earther