"
Skepticism, like chastity, should not be relinquished too readily." ~ George Santayana
"
The logic of validation allows us to move between the two limits of dogmatism and skepticism." ~ Paul Ricoeur
Who can you believe these days? Everybody seems to have an angle...some agenda behind what they say. Once upon a time...yes, it kind of seems like a fairy tale now...people held truth, honesty and unbiased reporting of facts in high regard. This seems to be a long-lost relic of the past in today's age of marketing, sound bites, political spin and pseudo-journalism.
Today, everyone seems just to accept, and even expect, that politicians of every stripe are spinning, slanting, or just plain lying about the facts. We know that, regardless of party, our politicians are corrupted by the influences, trips, voting blocks, and campaign donations (read bribes) of the thousands and thousands of lobbyists and special-interest groups. We know that these politicians tell us
what they want us to hear...regardless of the facts...so that they can advance their (or rather their lobbyist's) agendas. But even though we all seem to know this, a large number of Americans seem to trust government, as a whole, to do what is best for the public.
Sadly, this propensity to bend the truth to the requirements of an agenda has expanded in our society far beyond politics, as we typically think of it.
Scientific American recently
reported that, "False positives and exaggerated results in peer-reviewed scientific studies have reached epidemic proportions in recent years. The problem is rampant in economics, the social sciences and even the natural sciences, but it is particularly egregious in biomedicine."
We have all grown up in a world where science has accomplished amazing things. We have come to think that with enough time and funding, science could solve all of the problems of the world and provide wondrous inventions to make our lives immeasurably better...and that's where the problem begins. As Scientific American puts it:
"The problem begins with the public’s rising expectations of science. Being human, scientists are tempted to show that they know more than they do. The number of investigators—and the number of experiments, observations and analyses they produce—has also increased exponentially in many fields, but adequate safeguards against bias are lacking. Research is fragmented, competition is fierce and emphasis is often given to single studies instead of the big picture.
Much research is conducted for reasons other than the pursuit of truth. Conflicts of interest abound, and they influence outcomes. In health care, research is often performed at the behest of companies that have a large financial stake in the results. Even for academics, success often hinges on publishing positive findings. The oligopoly of high-impact journals also has a distorting effect on funding, academic careers and market shares. Industry tailors research agendas to suit its needs, which also shapes academic priorities, journal revenue and even public funding."
Remember, the article says this trend is "epidemic" in the disciplines of "economics, the social sciences and even the natural sciences." While they single out the influences on biomedicine by "companies that have a large financial stake," the case can also easily be made that government, and their seemingly endless supply of grant money, also exerts undue influence on the scientific process. These "conflicts of interests" with the government are most probably the exact reason for the "false positives and exaggerated results" in the science of so-called man-made global warming, known as Climategate. Remember, Al Gore told us that "the science is settled." That's because his preferred science stood to make him millions and millions of dollars. In economics, government has a vested interest in promoting models that support their continued expansion, central planning and out-of-control spending. This is why there seems to be no end to the number of economists who will say that Stimulus spending and increasing debt is a good thing...despite the historical evidence. And similarly in social science, government wants research that shows that their Great Society programs do indeed work, regardless of what you think you see in the inner-cities.
Just as we should always maintain a healthy skepticism about the claims of miracle cures, fast weight loss products or hair restoration creams, we should be that much more skeptical of government-backed scientific findings. While buying an ineffectual sexual enhancement supplement may be personally very disappointing, buying government's science-backed solutions can threaten the very liberty on which our country is founded. So, look closely at what you are being told. Check for past results. Does the proposal square with what we have seen in the past? As the article says:
"First, we must routinely demand robust and extensive external validation—in the form of additional studies—for any report that claims to have found something new. Many fields pay little attention to the need for replication or do it sparingly and haphazardly. Second, scientific reports should take into account the number of analyses that have been conducted, which would tend to downplay false positives."
Skepticism is a very healthy attribute. It keeps us from falling prey to snake oil salesmen, charlatans and tyrants. Don't blindly believe what your government, or so-called scientists tell you. Make sure you understand the implications of their proposals. Try to discern the hidden agendas...and dearly guard your liberties.
"
Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel." ~ Patrick Henry
