Every so often on Wayward Letters, I will take the chance to vent at something that's been rolling around in my mind (which I've called "Opinion Time" because "I've Got Opinions and I'm Not Afraid To Use Them" is about seven words too long). This first one came about after reading the comments on an article in "The Punch" about environmentalism (my exciting, exciting life).
When there is a problem with your car, you see a mechanic. When there is faulty wiring in your house, you go to an electrician. You trust that these people are qualified experts who know what they are doing.
When a climatologist, a qualified expert in (you guessed it) the climate, tells people about global warming, there is an uproar.
This is a very real problem in society today: people not trusting the experts. When an overwhelming majority of experts say something related to their field, it should be that society accepts this and deals with it. In an ideal world, when a majority of climatologists say that global warming exists or a majority of medical scientists (I'm not sure of the exact field) say that vaccines work, then people should try to slow carbon emissions and get their kids vaccinated. In an ideal world, when 99.9% of biologists believe in evolution, then people should stop teaching creationism in schools (two quick things: one, the link is to show I'm not pulling numbers out of my ass; and two, I don't like to use the word "believe" with reference to scientific evidence, but it's more or less the best word for the job.)
Conversely, when a majority of scientists say that homeopathy is pseudoscience (read: pigswill), then people should stop advocating homeopathy. Tim Minchin has an excellent quote that I think works well here: "By definition, alternative medicine has either not been proved to work, or been proved not to work. Do you know what they call "alternative medicine" that's been proved to work? Medicine."
Similarly, when it comes to 9/11, and the majority of engineers claim that the Twin Towers collapsed because of the plane crash and not because of explosives, then it can be assumed that a plane was responsible (while this isn't strictly related, I do not believe there was a conspiracy and claiming that the US did it is an insult to all those who died or who were affected by what happened on 9/11).
Before you get the impression that I'm advocating blindly believing in the scientific majority, I'd like to clarify a few points. I am very much in favour of questioning and testing what you are taught: this is what science is about. That being said, when a majority of experts in a certain field agree about something in their field, this should be taken into account, and where possible, should be believed rather than not.
Secondly, if you have no proof in something, do not claim that your opinions are based in science. If you want to make an educated point or you want to back up an opinion, provide proof.
So, to sum up: trust the experts in their fields. Feel free to question/test the evidence, but don't claim you have proof unless you do. The general rule of thumb is: experts are experts for a reason; defer to their expert opinion.
OK, I reckon that's the end of this Opinion Time. There's probably a lot more to say about this, but I reckon I've made my point. And if not, well, I can't think of much else to say. So the post is now officially over. Enjoy my opinions!
AB
No comments:
Post a Comment