Here's Why Some Scientists Refuse To Just 'Stick To Science'

The incoming administration and science do not get along. President Donald Trump has already met with vaccine critic Robert Kennedy Jr., called climate change a hoax on several occasions, once said that environmentally friendly light bulbs cause cancer... the list goes on.

Things got especially heated this past weekend, when scientists reacted to press secretary Sean Spicer making obviously false claims at the post-inauguration press briefing, and later, to Trump's senior adviser Kellyanne Conway referring to Spicer's comments as, wait for it, "alternative facts." Scientists took their grievances to Twitter, and critics responded with a common refrain: "stick to science."

But an increasing number of scientists are refusing to stay silent when it comes to the factual distortions and outright lies peddled by politicians.

Some people think scientists engaging in politics might harm their credibility, or worse, hide an issue with their scientific research. To the contrary, climate scientists like James Hanson and Michael Mann have become public advocates precisely because of their deep understanding of the real-world consequences of their chosen subject of study. Today, we don't exactly (yet) have a case of astronomers and physicists being forced to defend whether black hole exists -- instead, we have an administration challenging facts in general, which are the basis of all scientific research.

Naturally, scientists across many fields are feeling the need to speak out.

Science's ultimate goal is to establish truth and facts by accumulating evidence. When the administration chooses to speak falsely to the American people, it's up to scientists, the ones who work tirelessly to figure out what's true, to stand up for evidence-based reasoning. "I think that if we see a situation where people are being encouraged to ignore objective reality, it's kind of improtant to push back against that," Katherine (Katie) Mack, astrophysicist at the University of Melbourne in Australia, told Gizmodo, "as people who have an interest in the idea that we can understand and interact with the world as it is."

"This isn't particular to scientists, I just think democracy works best when people are invested, and care enough to speak out," Robert McNees, associate professor in the Department of Physics at Loyola University Chicago, told Gizmodo in a Twitter direct message. "Yes. I mean, sure, I would love to tweet some interesting things about black holes today. But I am concerned that dishonest representations of climate science designed to erode public confidence might have some bad consequences for science in general, so I can't ignore that."

And for some, hot-button issues like Flint's lead-tainted water and gay conversion therapy transcend science. "We're human beings as well," Matthew R. Francis, physics Ph.D and science writer, told Gizmodo. "These are issues that affect all of us."

Update 8:37PM: This post has been updated to include a quote from Katie Mack.

WATCH MORE: Science & Health News


    Telling someone to "Stick to science" is basically saying:

    "Scientific fact harms our political ideals, We must stop you participating in the discussion"

    The republicans clearly see science as a threat to their existence.

      "How dare you scientists try to interfere with our politics while we politicians are interfering with education and science funding! The nerve!"

      Worse than that if you chane the context and tell people to stick to their basic job category it is super insulting.

      "Stick to customer service" "Stick to waitering" "Stick to parcel delivery" "Stick to unemployment"

      Need a bot... someone says Stick to Science and replies with that persons job title.

      At the end of the day to opponents of clinate change isnt politics, its commercial lobbyists in energy and industrial sectors that see short term outlays of changing to greener technology hurting their share points and bonuses.

    This shit makes my head hurt, how far down the rabbit hole are we now exactly? I really hope that common sense prevails, but seriously, how the bloody hell did we get here in the first place.
    If there are any aliens out there collecting specimens for an intergalactic zoo, this planet may self-destruct soon, it'd be nice if some of us survived!

      how far down the rabbit hole are we now exactly
      Further than Alice mate!

    Same thing here in Australia. Abbott and Co and their attack on climate change science broadened into a general discrediting of science.
    This goes from political to cultural and can become embedded distrust of science in a generation of people. It can take a long time to undo this type of damage.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now