To Understand How Science Denial Works, Look to History

To Understand How Science Denial Works, Look to History

2020 has been a historic year— and mostly not in a good way. Among many things, we saw a historic level of disregard of scientific advice with respect to the COVID-19 virus, a disregard that made the pandemic worse in the U.S. than in many other countries. But while the events of 2020 may feel unprecedented, the social pattern of rejecting scientific evidence did not suddenly appear this year.

There was never any good scientific reason for rejecting the expert advice on COVID, just as there has never been any good scientific reason for doubting that humans evolved, that vaccines save lives, and that greenhouse gases are driving disruptive climate change. Throughout the first half of the 20th century, most Americans saw science as something that made our lives better. Science had deepened our understanding of the natural world, which helped us to cure diseases, light our homes and bring new forms of entertainment into our lives.

However, somewhere along the way, the public's trust in science began to erode. The chief culprit in this darker story was the tobacco industry, whose playbook has been well documented by historians of science, technology, and medicine, as well as epidemiologists and lawyers. It disparaged science by promoting the idea that the link between tobacco use and lung cancer and other diseases was uncertain or incomplete and that the attempt to regulate it was a threat to American freedom.

In our 2010 book, Merchants of Doubt, Erik M. Conway and I showed how the same arguments were used to delay action on acid rain, the ozone hole, and climate change—and this year we saw the spurious "freedom" argument being used to disparage mask wearing. The tactics employed by the tobacco industry set a dangerous precedent, allowing doubt to be cast on scientific consensus and sowing the seeds of science denial.

Scientific colleagues often ask me why I traded a career in science for a career in history. History, for some of them, is just "dwelling on the past." But, as the bard said in The Tempest: "What's past is prologue." If we are to confront disinformation, the rejection of scientific findings, and the negative uses of technology, we have to understand the past that has brought us to this point.

By examining historical instances of science denial, we can identify common points and patterns that have contributed to the erosion of trust in science. One common point is the use of doubt as a weapon against scientific consensus. Whether it's the tobacco industry casting doubt on the link between smoking and cancer or climate change deniers sowing doubt about the role of greenhouse gases, the goal is to create enough uncertainty to prevent meaningful action.

Another common point is the manipulation of public opinion through the exploitation of fears and emotions. The tobacco industry played on the fear of government intrusion and loss of personal freedom, while climate change deniers tap into concerns about economic consequences and job losses. By appealing to people's emotions, science deniers are able to sway public opinion away from the overwhelming evidence presented by the scientific community.

So, how can we combat science denial? Here are three actionable pieces of advice:

1. Improve science communication: Scientists need to step up their efforts in communicating their research and findings to the public in a clear and accessible manner. The use of jargon and complex language often alienates the general public, making it easier for science deniers to dismiss scientific evidence. By bridging the gap between scientists and the public, we can foster a better understanding and appreciation for the importance of scientific research.

2. Foster critical thinking skills: Education plays a crucial role in combating science denial. By promoting critical thinking skills in schools and universities, we can empower individuals to evaluate scientific claims and evidence for themselves. Teaching students how to question, analyze, and interpret information will enable them to make informed decisions based on factual evidence rather than falling prey to misinformation.

3. Hold accountable those who spread disinformation: Science denial often relies on the spread of misinformation and disinformation. It is essential to hold accountable those who intentionally spread false information that undermines scientific consensus. By promoting responsible journalism and fact-checking, we can ensure that accurate information is disseminated and misinformation is debunked.

In conclusion, science denial has a long history rooted in the manipulation of doubt, exploitation of emotions, and the erosion of public trust. To combat this dangerous trend, we must understand the past and learn from historical instances of science denial. By improving science communication, fostering critical thinking skills, and holding accountable those who spread disinformation, we can work towards a future where scientific evidence is respected and trusted. Only by learning from history can we create a more informed and scientifically literate society.