The march for science table talk was very interesting since there were so many surprising facts/figures/thoughts presented. For example, GRF Tyler showed us what the proposed budget for various government agencies (NIH, FDA, etc) under the Trump Administration looks like, as well as the results of a survey where people were asked if climate change is real.

I think that people are really disillusioned by the world around them particularly because of what information is available to them/the things media presents to them. For example, anti-vaxxers do not believe in the benefits of vaccines because they were presented a poorly done research that was “presented” as “fact.” Lack of education on top of a poor understanding of science plus a difference in experience (modern day people have never lived through a smallpox outbreak, for example, so they don’t know the true value of vaccines and how detrimental it could be to have even 3% of the population unvaccinated) resulted in the emergence of the anti-vax movement. The topic of climate change is headed in a similar direction, with a large number of well-educated/well-informed population speaking out to the government to try to change things, and then with a growing number of ill-informed, uneducated population perpetuating that “climate change isn’t real.”

All of this is incredibly problematic since scientific decisions impact all of us. Since we all live on this earth, a smallpox outbreak caused by anti-vaxxers would impact every single person who lives on this earth. The same goes for climate change. This is why the March For Science means so much. It means educating the population to help make decisions that impact all of us, and it’s advocating for continued scientific research and discovery, because on the long run, that’s how humankind will advance. It’s particularly sad that the current administration doesn’t see things this way (choosing to invest more in defense) and I’m scared to see where this kind of mindset (science is objective/should be ignored) would take us should we continue on this trajectory.

In the talk, we also mentioned how to best advocate for science. Scientists are good at what they do, but are not good at advocating for themselves and not good at convincing policy makers to change policies. I think we came to the conclusion that as scientists/supporters for science, we must not only have facts, but have reasons why these facts are important: in the form of anecdotes and calls to actions.

There are lots to be learned from the March for Science and there’s still a lot we can all do to be better advocates for science. It all starts here.

In last week’s table talk we discussed the March for Science that was to happen on Earth Day.  The March for Science was an event coordinated by many individuals who fear that science will not be taken seriously or given priority in the new government in power. Due to the history of denying climate change, lack of support for women’s biological rights, and a general distaste in studying clean energy, the future of science seems grim. With the new government proposing billions of dollars worth of cuts to organizations such as the NIH, NASA, USDA, and many more, it is clear that the new government does not see science as a priority. Because of this, many want to mobilize and voice their concerns. We discussed how we must be the voices that gap the everyday man to the scientists. Currently many don’t prioritize science research because they do not understand it. Scientists are unable or unwilling to explain the importance of some of their research to the general person, and due to this disconnect, people just have a lack of enthusiasm and care for research. Without care, they are less likely to support measures that increase funding or prioritize science. To spread awareness is an important goal.

During the table talk we discussed how much money the current administration is taking away from research funding, and some of the amounts were frightening. Billions of dollars were being cut from clean energy initiatives, which was not extremely surprising, but a lot was also being taking from branches such as the NIH and USDA, segments of science where the importance of these two branches has been proven.

To spread awareness and education are what we should be worried about. To spread the truths about climate change and the facts that support clean, renewable energy, we might be able to save our planet and move towards a healthier, greener world. We will need a lot of support for this to occur, and that is why education is crucial. Those of us with science backgrounds must find a way to bridge the gap between the regular population and scientists in order to spread this message.

On April 17th, I attended the Table Talk regarding the March for Science that occurred on Earth Day, April 22, 2017. Initially, what attracted me to this Rose event is the fact that I’ve become more interested in the environment and studying sustainability, so I thought that the talk would provide me with some knowledge as to what the march was for.

What I learned, however, was more shocking than I expected. While I thought that under the Trump administration, funding for certain research sectors would be reduced, I didn’t realize to what extent those proposed cuts were. The numbers further amplified the importance of the March to me. Additionally, during our talk, we spoke about how individuals could effectively communicate the importance of science to those who are more skeptical; given the nature of such a complex topic, we didn’t come up with a definitive answer but just that when conversing, it’s important to not put down another person’s beliefs because that only then makes them a stronger proponent of their beliefs.

The March for science is taking place over this weekend, with it around the corner our table talk was centered around it. There were many ideas discussed, as a non science major I found it very interesting. However, what intrigued me the most was some of the data we discussed.

This data captivated my interest since I assumed the public and scientists agreed that the cause for climate change was caused by human activity. Yet, after seeing this data I began to think why is there a disparity between the view of the public and the scientists. I believe that there are two main causes for this disparity. Firstly, this gap between the view of the public and scientists occur due to the education system. Most people including myself only learnt and understood the severity of climate change and its causes in college. I was not taught about the climate change and the fact that it such a serious problem in present society until I began college. Therefore, I also may have contributed towards the human activities that cause climate change. The solution to this problem is that all students should be educated about climate change and the serious threat it poses to our society at much earlier stage in life than post-secondary education. Those who are unable to attend school should be educated in other ways such as the media about climate change. Therefore, I believe that one cause for such a disparity exists between the public and scientists is due to the education system. 

Secondly, I believe most scientist do not speak out to alert and educate the public about their research and findings. There is more information that scientists have about climate change that the general public does not have. This gap in information also adds to the disparity between the public and scientist on climate change. The solution to this problem is for scientist to make more information about climate change public and in simple laymen terms that are easily understood by people with all different levels of education. This will help more people understand that it is in fact human activity that is causing the plant to get warmer and that we need to all try to reduce activities that harm the planet. 

In conclusion, I believe that the main cause for the disparity between the view of the public and scientist is due to the flaws in the education system and the existence of asymmetric information about climate change that the scientists are aware of but the public is unaware.