Last night at the Long Center in Austin, Texas, I got to listen to Neil DeGrasse Tyson convey his thoughts and approach to tackling the current "siege on science" being displayed by the powers that be. It was a very interesting talk. Most folks would assume such a talk would be a pro-Left, anti-Right proposition, but it was extremely fairly balanced where he deployed the use of
data and
facts to look at how to combat the waning interest and belief in science on both sides of the political spectrum. He leaned in on his experiences with both Democrat and Republic presidents, looking at data being utilized through social media and the different positioning of both sides when it came to scientific research. There were definitely a few surprises, including some in the data I am replicating from his slide deck from last night, which shows % of GDP on science per presidential term:
The data shows there has been a steady decline in expenditure on science initiatives since Reagan, but that both parties have been responsible for that decline. I guess you could say that this may be a response to increasing private sector investment, but there are so many risks in relying more heavily on private sector science, including research priorities being skewed towards profit margins, the securing of vital research that could benefit others for private gain/ownership and the potential lack of accountability to name a few. Anyway, this is just one example of the ways in which science was becoming less and less a priority for government, and something that concerns him and other scientists globally.
The attack on science is not just fiscal. The adoption of "alternative facts" and alternative science is also on the rise. We live in a time where true facts are questioned, and alternatives - not so much. The anti-vax movement, the belief in a flat Earth, the politicization of science from any direction, chemtrails, UFOs - all are examples of where myth, rather than scientific analysis, reigns supreme. Thanks to social media, the explosion of this stuff is astounding. Back in February of this year, there were several reports of large meteors or "bolides" across the United States and elsewhere. These were legitimate reports, with real recordings of the events coupled with evidence supplied by scientific establishments including the American Meteor Society. However, social media quickly was home to countless more "meteor sightings" that were actually aircraft contrails. I saw these social media posts first-hand on my local neighborhood groups and other places, which showed images of objects there were clearly aircraft contrails heading off into the western sky at sunset. I tried pointing out that these images were indeed aircraft contrails, but the original posters chose to ignore them. Not sexy enough, I guess.
Some of the strategies that Neil leaned into in terms of countering this phenomenon included, at a high level:
- Lead with wonder, not data — curiosity disarms defensiveness. Get your data in later.
- Use humor and pop culture to smuggle science into entertainment
- Separate the process of science from fallible individual scientists
- Appeal to pragmatism — nations that defund science fall behind
- Call out false balance in media coverage of fringe vs. consensus views
- Assume ignorance, not bad faith — treat denial as an education problem
What was particularly interesting to me was that I realized I, myself, had been deploying some of these strategies while I gave basic astronomy classes at the nearby observatory when I was running them there. I was always trying to find ways to make the universe relatable to those that signed up for my sessions, using modern movies, pop culture references and the like to explain some of what was going on up there. When I would get asked about whether or not we could deter an asteroid or comet from hitting the Earth by one of my astronomy guests, for example, my response would lead with a funny overview of launching drunk oil miners into space to drill on the surface and drop nukes into the asteroid itself. The crowd typically laughed at the reference - they got it. Then, I'd discuss and show video from DART mission which did successfully alter the course or orbit of one asteroid around another using sheer kinetic energy. I'm no Neil DeGrasse Tyson, but it was a nice form of validation, and something I'll be taking into my upcoming astronomy venture coming soon.
Anyway, it was an interesting presentation, interspersed with his usual dry humor and a few ads for several of his books. I was fine with that, as I love his work. Neil is not everyone's cup of tea, but his work to defend and amplify scientific thought and to communicate the wonders of the universe are admirable.
