Giving the World a #ScienceHug

If there is one thing that fake skeptics are known for, it's not their warm and fuzzy demeanor. 

Don't Be A Dick Guys, Says Phil Plait 

This makes the new hashtag that our old friend Kevin Folta is trying trying to popularize, that much more ironic.

"In this week of technical failures and personal challenges, this week’s podcast investigates the merits of civil conversation. In an angry online environment, can we use the tools of trust building, listening, and empathy to build trust and have greater influence? I discuss my current circumstances and the status of the social media discussion of vaccine hesitancy and genetic engineering. Can we influence the acceptance of good technology with a soft touch? Can we win more hearts and minds with kindness than with data? This is a very important episode I hope you’ll find illuminating."

Clearly the need for this type of outreach speaks to the deficit in basic civility from a lot of self-described science communicators. It has been touched on here before how important science communication is, which is why this blog exists in large part. The warped form of "SciComm" displayed by fake skeptics harms the efforts of legitimate scientists, journalists, activists, and educators to improve public knowledge and inspire action on a manner of important topics that affect every living being on earth. Quite literally the future of our species and planet are on the line here, and we can't afford to fuck this up.

So while we can definitely see examples out there of science communication being done right by both professionals and laypersons alike, have things improved with the behavior of those who identify as Skeptics since Phil Plait's blunt admonishment? This blog alone is a testament to the fact that things seem to only be worsening. The continued popularity of social media accounts and celebrity Skeptics with surly attitudes who endlessly debunk the same tired shit and throw around insults is evident to those who pay even a minimum amount of attention. 

Is the #ScienceHug a real good faith effort, or is it just a ploy? Does Professor Folta really practice what he preaches? Will he help Skeptics turn a new leaf?

Well, in this first example, he's using the hashtag to call someone a liar...not off to great start. Wonder how they took it?

Mmmm, not so good. How about Folta's followers? Are they giving Twitter a big, warm #ScienceHug? Let's find out!

So, not really off to a great start.

If Kevin's past track record is any indication, we can expect that #ScienceHug isn't going to bring about any lasting change to the attitudes of a particular faction of SciComm.

See Science Bullies, Censorship or Consequences, and Empathy Deficiency Syndrome for a slice of the recent history of SciComm by fake skeptics. 

Two Sides of the Same Coin

I'm a rather busy person, but sometimes I have deep thoughts when showering or brushing my teeth. This latest installment of Sick Of It All (the blog, not the band) comes to you from the nether regions of my brain and my impeccable hygiene.

It's been well established here before that many Skeptics are not in the habit of peering through the lens of self-reflection, perhaps because their enormous egos cast a shadow that obscures the view. Whatever the case may be, it seems to go unnoticed by them how their club has become one of the extreme ends of a varied spectrum.

A Crude Spectrum of Scientific Thought & Opinion 

Skeptics have essentially cast themselves in the role of hero and savior to the Regular People who they seem to believe, at any moment, could be sucked into the vortex of Fringey Cringey. The dimension where chemtrails criss cross the skyline of a flat earth populated by deep state illuminati lizard people that you access just by say, visiting a chiropractor or using some essential oils.

Steven Novella has described Skeptics as the "last line standing" to protect the rest of the world who are at risk of "being completely overwhelmed by quackery and nonsense."

And yet, more and more we see that they have become a caricature that is simply a mirror image of the quackery and nonsense they claim to be protecting us from. 

The Skeptics are the Conspiracy Theory Conspiracy Theorists. Take this example from prominent Skeptic voice, David Gorski.

You may recall back in 2016 when Zika virus was all over the headlines because of its link to microcephaly. Brazil had such a large increase in cases compared to elsewhere, that it seemed that there was another factor at play. Some public health professionals brought up the idea that the larvicide pyriproxifen may have had a role in increasing cases of microcephaly. 

Rather than concede that this should at least be properly investigated, which is what the scientific method calls for, Gorski, in his role as Orac wrote at Respectful Insolence of this hypothesis as a baseless conspiracy theory that was something to be mocked.

"Monsanto. It just had to be Monsanto. I will give these cranks props for figuring out a way to blame Monsanto for the microcephaly suspected to be caused by Zika virus without mentioning GMOs. Well played, Second Nexus, well-played. Not so well-played, Mr. Takei. Not so well-played in falling for this."

What did Mr. Takei share that was so horrible? An article based on a report from Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Villages. Despite Gorski's lame attempt at science cockblocking, the scientific community heard the recommendation by doctors from the Brazilian Association forCollective Health (ABRASCO) who demanded that urgent epidemiological studies be carried out to look for a causal link.

Flash forward to today, when these studies have now been conducted. One such study found a potential mechanism that could explain the increase in microcephaly case in areas where pyriproxifen was used.

A report in The Conversation by the study authors says, "...we have shown that pyriproxyfen could indeed exacerbate the already severe effects the Zika virus has on foetal brain development." And describe the possible mechanism that they show in their study, "...pyriproxyfen impairs thyroid hormone signalling in the brain, modifying crucial processes for its proper development."

Does this sound like a conspiracy theory to you?

If Gorski and friends had their way, and sometimes they do succeed in this, their debunking would be taken as the authoritative source on topics they don't wish to see researched. For the people exposed to this larvacide, we are lucky they did not succeed here. But it's doubtful they will ever admit or correct these types of blunders, they would rather just ignore the new science, and move on to another subject.

This isn't much different from how cults like QAnon operate on the other extreme end of the spectrum. "Trust the science" may as well be, "Trust the plan." I'm not suggesting that Skeptics are cult members, but they do exhibit some cult-like behavior at times. When the predictions (or debunking) doesn't bear out, they just move to a new target. 

Skeptics use a flawed version of the scientific method, as the above example illustrates. This is not any different than the pseudoscientific methodology used by flat earth proponents and others on the Fringey Cringey end of the spectrum. It doesn't matter if your conclusions end up being correct, and we have just seen that they don't always land on the right side in many cases. It is the method you use that matters. 

One might cloak themselves in talk of science, evidence and reason, but if they don't follow the scientific method, they may find themselves on the extreme end of the spectrum of scientific thought and opinion.

The Bromance Continues: Kevin Folta Hearts Patrick Moore

The most recent episode of Talking Biotech podcast is yet another chapter in one of the love stories for the ages, that between Kevin Folta and Patrick Moore. We've seen their affection on display before in Turning a Blind Ideology.

Despite the title, the topic of climate change comes up for a large portion of this interview. Folta's description at the end also understated Moore's stance just a little bit. 

The dude is a full on denier.

In order to save you the pain of listening, I have summarized their discussion as follows

In addition to spouting utter BS about climate, Moore says to Folta “People have been indoctrinated to believe plastic is destroying the oceans.” Regarding the great pacific garbage patch, “It’s a fake, it doesn’t exist. It’s is not there. There is no pacific garbage patch.”

 

He continues, “It is a photo shop on the internet.”

Source

After you read his book, unless you are “completely indoctrinated into the cult of climate catastrophe,” you will believe what he’s saying. Also, polar bear counters are lying.

 
Kevin now chimes in to say he’s not a climate skeptic, he’s a skeptic of the catastrophic interpretations....then a half ass push back on one of Moore’s claims, who talks over him a bunch to declare, “we are actually in a 6,000 year cooling period now.”

 
“Read my book Kevin.”

 
“I’m a member of the CO2 Coalition. (A front group) Our conclusion is clear, increased CO2 is 100% beneficial for the environment.” 

Kevin then says he relies on the info from the National Academy of Sciences re climate, then asks Moore “who am I supposed to trust?” Moore bashes the NAS, and spews more propaganda. “We (humans) have restored a balance to the global carbon cycle.”

 
Folta reiterates his question about who can people trust, Moore says read my book.

Folta continues glossing over Moore’s ridiculous claims and kisses his ass.

Moore unsurprisingly says, “The solution is nuclear energy.”
He then sings the praises of fossil fuels, and goes on a tangent about nuclear again.

Nuclear, nuclear, nuclear.

 
Kevin loves it.

Kevin loves Patrick.

Fin.

In all seriousness, this is bad. Kevin has given this guy a platform to sell his book and promote his brand of ideological pseudoscience. Folta once again demonstrates how he gives Moore a pass on  climate science (and basic fucking ecology and logic). He weakly challenged Moore's assertions which just adds to the evidence that any credibility afforded to Folta by virtue of his teaching position at the University of Florida is undeserved. This whole podcast was an embarrassing farce. 

Several on Twitter also noticed this and voiced their criticism.

Sadly though, many who should definitely know better, including one of the organizers for the March for Science liked Kevin's shares of the podcast with Moore. Facepalm.

If you want to learn about climate science, here's a list compiled by MPH@GW, the George Washington University online Master of Public Health program. They don't list Moore, his book, The CO2 Coalition, or Kevin Folta, so you should probably be okay.

A Skeptic Promotes DDT...Again

Just in case we aren't already on the same page that getting your science information from people who call themselves babes is a bad idea, Yvette d'Entremont Ross (SciBabe) decided to make sure it was heard loud and clear with her "Moment of Science" dated January 30, 2021.

While the world is upside down and on fire, we can all take great comfort in the fact that Yvette is out there swooshing her lab coat over to the computer to type up a citation-less, expletive-peppered missive in defense of toxic chemicals and launch it onto her Facebook page.

DDT, the "miricle pesticide"

Here is the TL;DR version -

• Early pesticides were very toxic and bad!
• Enter organic chemistry...
• DDT saves half a billion lives! Wow!
• DDT safe!
• DDT safe!
• Everything's a chemical!
• Rachel Carson's book is just overblown bullshit!
• Okay so DDT was sorta bad for some birds...and it's a persistent organic pollutant...
• It's also a probable carcinogen, but coffee, so just ignore that.
• Risk is something I'm going gloss over in this sentence.
• INVOKE 500 MILLION LIVES STAT AGAIN FOR MIC DROP
• "DDT is good for me-e-e!" 🎶
• People will know I'm full of shit when they read this, but...
• Oh well! 

There is a veritable library of information on this topic, should readers wish to learn more about the history of DDT and malaria that Yvette seems to think isn't "nuanced" enough to include in her hastily written Facebook take. 

This isn't the first time SciBabe has used her platform to share myths about DDT, and it probably won't be the last.