Whether it is Corporatist manipulation to undermine science (tobacco, chemicals) or bizarre conspiracy theory paths (AIDS is caused by West and isn’t related to sex) or overwrought Luddite parents (vaccinations), a simple truth:
Anti-Science SyndromE Sufferers threaten lives.
In early 2009, Joe Romm laid out the preliminary diagnostician’s tool for anti-science syndrome . As he noted,
Like most syndromes, anti-science syndrome [ASS] is a collection of symptoms that individually may not be serious, but taken together can be quite dangerous — at least it can be dangerous to the health and well-being of humanity if enough people actually believe the victims.
Romm laid out three key elements in the realm of climatology and climate science that are indicative of an ASS sufferer
- Focuses attacks on non-scientists.
- Repetition of long-debunked denier talking points, commonly without links to supporting material.
- Scientists (and others) who restate and republishing claims widely debunked in the scientific literature.
Romm suggested that there are many people who fit the whole diagnostic list and are appropriately referred to as A.S.S.-wholes.
Anti-Science Syndrome sufferers, of course, are not limited to the domain of climate science. There were a range of “scientists” who questioned, no matter how often their arguments were refuted, whether tobacco could cause cancer. There are those who, perhaps in the pursuit of profit, will count up the “benefits” of (for example) insecticides without placing any value onto the costs. Not surprisingly, there is significant overlap between scientists who are climate skeptics with those who work against science in other realms. (Highly recommended, on this, Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway’s Merchants of Doubt.) In other words, there is the entire realm of anti-science syndrome — with a coterie of credentialed scientists in it — euphemistically called sound science.
Sound science is a phrase often used by corporate public relations and government agency spokesmen to describe the scientific research used to justify a claim or position. Sound science, however, has no specific scientific definition itself, so the phrase is used subjectively. “Sound science” is not a synonym of “good science” practices, but rather it is an ideological policy statement more about the criteria for the use of science in policy making. It is invoked mostly to call into question the validity of a given study or scientific statement.
Lack of “sound science” is a common critique used against public health and consumer activists in an attempt to discredit their concerns about public safety and environmental risk. Junk science is often presented as the opposite of “sound science,” usually for propagandistic purposes that favor industry.
Many* advocates of Sound Science are, in fact, Anti-Science Syndrome sufferers seeking to infect others, especially public policy, with their anti-science delusions.
When we begin to examine, truly, the impacts of these perspectives and these arguments, we find that their beliefs could provide economics for the short-term and/or specific elements (organizations), but which serve to undercut the viability and strength of the overall economic system. Other than in terms of reducing long-term social security payments due to higher mortality, does anyone seriously want to argue that the over economic system and society are strengthened via increased tobacco smoking? While chemicals (plastics, etc) are critical to modern society and our wealth, does anyone seriously want to argue that misrepresentations and deceptions as to the medical and other impacts of a chemical benefit society and promote long-term economic health? Did ‘sound science’ arguing that CFCs really didn’t contribute to the ozone layer depletion, that ozone depletion wasn’t a big risk, and, finally, that dealing with the ozone challenge would be too expensive contribute to developing a healthier economic system? And, promoting truthiness and deception-laden talking points about climate change risks and climate change mitigation benefits does not foster a stronger and more secure economic future. In short, these Anti-Science Syndrome sufferers foster and demonstrate a fundamental Hatred Of a Livable Economic System.
While, sometimes in the short but definitely in the long-term, these anti-science syndrome sufferers undermine societal strength in economic and other terms, they do something else: they directly and indirectly threaten lives.
For example, the Anti-Science SyndromE Sufferers promoting falsehoods about the risks of vaccines (re, for example, autism and vaccines foster increased risks of disease:
Concerns about a link between vaccines and autism were first raised more than a decade ago by British physician Andrew Wakefield.
His report, based on 12 children, has since been discredited and was retracted earlier this year by the journal that published it. In the meantime, it sparked a fierce worldwide debate among scientists and a health scare that caused many parents to shy away from recommended vaccines like the one against measles, mumps and rubella.
Outbreaks of all three diseases followed.
Sigh. A direct case where Anti-Science SyndromE Sufferers threatened (and, well, cost) lives. Even though this is discredited work, there are parents in my (and likely your) community who are fiercely proud that they have stood up to those wacky scientists and doctors with refusing to let their children have any vaccines. They complain that the rules won’t let their children go to the public school system without these vaccines. In this case, the authorities are siding with the science.
In that case, vaccines, there are not massive financial interests (that I am aware of) interested in undermining the science. And, this makes it that much easier for authorities to side with science.
Sadly, that is not the case with tobacco, plastics, formaldehyde’s health risks, and all too many areas of modern human civilization. There are large — to huge — financial gains to be made with public confusion about the actual state of the science and scientific understandings. And, these potential and real financial gains create significant incentives to undermine science and put roadblocks before government authorities acting in light of scientific understandings. The mother of all these arenas, in terms of financial interests and impacts on humanity? Climate Change science.
The fossil foolish and related interests have, quite literally, many $trillions at stake and they are willing to spend $billions to protect $10s of billions of profits. And, there efforts have been paying off. Even as the scientific understanding of climate change increases, even as the world increasingly demonstrates warming and increasingly chaotic weather patterns, even as … there is (again) increasing confusion in the American electorate about climate change science. (Actually, there is increasing certainty within one party: certainty that the scientific community is engaged in a massive fraud and that climate change is not an issue meriting concern or action.) The 2010 election risks a serious shift in Congress away from any substantive (truthful) understanding of climate science and away from any willingness to engage in serious discussion about actions to mitigate climate change.
These Climate Zombies are essentially the epitome of Anti-Science Syndrome suffering Haters Of a Livable Economic System. They are willing to sacrifice others at the altar of a false deity of “free-market capitalism” unbounded by regulation and unconstrained about concerns for “externalities”. And, sacrifice is a quite accurate term with humanity’s impact on the climate system already tipping the scales to contribute (massively) to other species extinctions and to human deaths (through droughts, disasters, and other climate chaos impacts). Their Anti-Science Syndrome suffering, if given even more power, will threaten even more lives in the years to come.
=================
* NOTE: Sadly, as with many ‘green/white washing’ terms, “sound science” sounds all too good. Real scientists and substantive scientific institutions, concerned about real issues, too often end up adapting the term.
60 responses so far ↓
1 Conspiracy Theorist Rush Dominates Media Coverage of Climate Change: Wonder why so many Americans are confused re science? // Aug 21, 2012 at 9:12 am
[…] guest post comes from Richard Myers. Simply put, when conspiracy theorist buffoon, anti-science syndrome suffering Rush Limbaugh touches more Americans on climate change science than the rest of the traditional […]
2 Conspiracy Theorist Trump’s Ego Headlining RNC Conspiracy Theory Dominated Event // Aug 22, 2012 at 11:52 am
[…] anti-science syndrome nature of the current RNC is all too clear with the GOP’s passion for global warming denial. […]
3 Climate Science Breitbart gets social science wrong too (again …) // Sep 4, 2012 at 5:04 am
[…] information in a ‘pretty package’ that captures the slavishly devoted attention of anti-science syndrome sufferers and confuses those who do not have the energy/resources to check behind the false blaring headlines […]
4 President Obama speaks re climate, crowd cheers, ‘The Village’ notices // Sep 7, 2012 at 1:58 pm
[…] spoke directly to climate issues. With a direct slap at Mitt Romney’s sad climate joking to anti-science cheering, the President said: And yes, my plan will continue to reduce the carbon pollution that is […]
5 PBS News Hour’s public service: demonstrating the shallowness of mainstream modern American journalism // Sep 17, 2012 at 8:12 pm
[…] she-said’ report giving visibility to one of the blogosphere’s most prominent anti-science syndrome sufferers without providing the casual viewer any context for understanding this self-proclaimed […]
6 @BarackObama tweets on climate: Yeah and sigh … // Oct 11, 2012 at 9:17 am
[…] of “hoax”, in the speech, was President Obama reacting to Mitt Romney’s joking anti-science dismissal of climate change in his RNC speech (and, well, lots of places elsewhere before and […]
7 Today’s GOP: Pale, Male, Stale, and addicted to the Tall Tale // Nov 7, 2012 at 3:17 pm
[…] of anti-science syndrome, with denial of climate science and promotion of “creationism” (and denigration of the […]
8 “Climate change: it’s even worse than we think” // Nov 21, 2012 at 2:54 pm
[…] decried modeling is, as climate denying anti-science syndrome sufferers like Jim Inhofe like to state, truly proving to have been wrong. Inhofe/et al are simply getting […]
9 Fox Affiliate Anchors Quit On Air due to political interference in their reporting: w/a climate science denial angle // Nov 25, 2012 at 5:58 am
[…] due to direction to skew their reporting for political reasons or should we close our eyes because Anti-Science Syndrome Hater Of a Livable Economy Palmer tells us there is nothing to see, “Period.” Share and […]
10 Faux Watching Climate Denier Recants After Watch “Chasing the Ice” // Nov 28, 2012 at 10:36 pm
[…] ask what President Obama can do about climate change in the face of a House run by extreme cases of Anti-Science Syndrome Haters Of a Livable Environmental System. Many have proposed using the Bully Pulpit. And, within that Pulpit, include invitations to the […]
11 Not to miss climate change stories / issues / items / events of 2012 // Dec 30, 2012 at 10:50 am
[…] was down. While Heartland has lost much of their funding and Corporate support, Hearthland’s Anti-Science Syndrome Hatred Of a Livable Economic System voices still get soapboxes in traditional media ‘balance’ articles and otherwise. […]
12 “There’s been no warming for X years …” // Jan 10, 2013 at 8:09 am
[…] might be at something like a plateau for the next five years has thrown meat out for the anti-science syndrome crowd. They are crowing that the Hadley “model” runs seemingly support their […]
13 One world, two realities: #BigAussieHeat // Jan 10, 2013 at 8:56 pm
[…] Professor Stephan Lewandowsky reminds us, the United States is not the only nation under siege by Anti-Science Syndrome Haters Of a Livable Economic System in positions of political […]
14 Capturing the nightmare of American politics: two exemplary graphs // Jan 18, 2013 at 1:55 pm
[…] Change denial (and, more broadly, Anti-Science Syndrome Hatred Of a Livable Economic System) is part and parcel of a generalized pattern of extreme radical right misrepresentation, […]
15 President Obama: Stop waffling and act on climate … // Feb 16, 2013 at 11:04 pm
[…] asking “Mother, May I” of Representative John Boehner and that too large a cohort of anti-science syndrome sufferers in charge of the U.S. House of […]
16 @OFA “Call Out Climate Change Deniers” // May 22, 2013 at 8:05 am
[…] creates for American prosperity and security. Not surprisingly, some of America’s favorite Anti-Science Syndrome suffering Haters Of a Livable Economic System appear prominently in this […]
17 Eli Rabett // May 22, 2013 at 9:29 am
The obvious response to “sound science”, is yep, it sounds like science but it ain’t
18 Illegitimate Legitimate Oversight: Climate Change edition // Sep 18, 2013 at 8:06 am
[…] legitimate oversight at today’s hearing. Instead, the hearing room is likely to be treated to anti-science syndrome suffering peppered with plenty of climate-denial gish gallop and impassioned staged outrage over miniscule […]
19 Anti-Science by anecdote vs evidence-based scientific method // Dec 8, 2013 at 7:07 am
[…] challenge of hosting a show on the HPV vaccine. And, with this show, demonstrated a serious case of anti-science syndrome. Truthfully put, Couric almost certainly put people’s health, safety, and lives at […]
20 Ashamnu: we have transgressed on climate change // Oct 12, 2016 at 10:13 am
[…] party is dominated and control by individuals and organizations suffering from an acute case of anti-science syndrome, real (political reality, not physical reality) barriers exist to the beneficial and cost-effective […]