A Continuation of the War Against Environmentalists

An article called The Progressive War on Science appeared on a friend's Facebook page, wherein the columnist tried to make the case against "progressives" (her term) and their abandonment of science, specifically the science on vaccinations and extending, perhaps illogically, to the opposition to pipelines and development of fossil fuel projects.

My response went like this:

 Hmmm... I'm not too surprised that Ms Wente hasn't provided a very nuanced commentary on this and neither are many of the people responding to the article, it would seem. It would have been perhaps more accurate for her to say that an inability to comprehend and accept what science has to say on various issues can come from any position on the political spectrum. Historically speaking, the connection between cigarettes and cancer, CFCs and the ozone hole, acid rain and forest health, secondhand smoke.... first there was the science behind each issue and then there were groups and individuals who spread the seeds of doubt, denying the science and delaying appropriate action. Some of the same groups and individuals active in the tobacco issue are active in the current climate change "controversy". Where has opposition to stem cell research come from? Opposition to the use of condoms to help prevent AIDS in Africa? The recent vilification of Rachel Carson and the ban on DDT? Some has come from right-wing conservatives, some from religious conservatives, some from free-market ideologues, some from people pathologically opposed to any kind of government regulation, seeing it as creeping socialism leading to communism. Where I live, there is a significant community that doesn't trust vaccines, Big Pharma, wireless smart meters or what they see coming out of the vapour trails of jets (aka: chemtrails). Some see conspiracies everywhere. I still see comments about vaccines being linked to autism, a myth that was debunked years ago. I doubt even Wente would be able to place all these attitudes on her simplified version of the political spectrum. I can't close without making a comment or two about climate change, pipelines and CO2. We know what the science has to say about this. Accept it or not. Pipelines may be the safest way to transport oil and gas, but the concern goes MUCH deeper than that. In much of BC, I suspect, the real concern is that a pipeline just contributes to more oil entering the market, adding to the climate issues we are starting to see now. There is also the very real concern about tanker spills. When they happen, they won't be on Alberta's coastline.

To further counter Ms Wente's assertions, readers might have a look at Vaccine Fear Mongers May be Wrong, but They're Not Ideological.

Liberals were the subject of an earlier, similar article that appeared in Scientific American.  A point that this article missed is that there is a difference between being anti-science (common in the far right) and being skeptical of technology (common in the far left).

One thing that is true is the existence of a concerted movement directed against science.  As a society, we would do well to pay attention to where it is coming from, because that is what's really dangerous.