Neil deGrasse Tyson has an urgent message for Americans, especially for some of our most powerful politicians.
In a video posted April 19 on his Facebook page, which already has more than 16 million views, the famed astrophysicist warns that science denial could ultimately destroy democracy.
Neil deGrasse Tyson Slams Science Deniers for 'Dismantling of Our informed Democracy'
Alongside the video post, Tyson wrote:
"Dear Facebook Universe, I offer this four-minute video on 'Science in America' containing what may be the most important words I have ever spoken. As always, but especially these days, keep looking up."
The
video shows how the U.S. rose from—as Tyson calls it— a "backwoods
country" to "one of the greatest nations the world has ever known"
because of science.
"But in this, the 21st century, when it comes
time to make decisions about science, it seems to me that people have
lost the ability to judge what is true and what is not," he laments.
"When
you have an established scientific emergent truth it is true, whether
or not you believe in it," he says. "And the sooner you understand that,
the faster we can get on with the political conversations about how to
solve the problems that face us."
The video then shows debates on heated scientific topics, including GMOs, climate change and vaccines, as well as a clip of Vice President Mike Pence,
then a congressman, saying on the House floor, "Let us demand that
educators around America teach evolution not as fact, but as theory."
Tyson says this shift in attitudes is a "recipe for the complete dismantling of our informed democracy."
More than 600 marches held around the world, with organizers saying
science 'under attack' from a White House that dismisses the threat of
climate change
Members of the Union for Concerned Scientists pose with Muppet character Beaker, in front of the White House.
Photograph: Jessica Kourkounis/Getty Images
Hundreds of thousands of climate researchers, oceanographers, bird
watchers and other supporters of science rallied in marches around the
world on Saturday, in an attempt to bolster scientists' increasingly
precarious status with politicians.
The main March for Science
event was held in Washington DC, where organizers made plans for up to
150,000 people to flock to the national mall, although somewhat fewer
than that figure braved the rain to attend. Marchers held a range of
signs. Some attacked Donald Trump, depicting the president as an ostrich
with his head in the sand or bearing the words: "What do Trump and
atoms have in common? They make up everything."
More than 600 marches took place around the world, on every continent bar Antarctica, in events that coincided with Earth Day.
The marches, the first of their kind, were officially non-political.
They were however conceived by three US-based researchers – Caroline
Weinberg, Valorie Aquino and Jonathan Berman – after Trump's
inauguration. Organizers have said science is "under attack" from the
Trump administration and many protesters excoriated the president with
signs that likened him to a dangerous orange toxin or disparaged his now
defunct university .
Trump released a statement that insisted his administration was
committed to preserving the "awe-inspiring beauty" of America, while
protecting jobs.
"Rigorous science is critical to my administration's efforts to
achieve the twin goals of economic growth and environmental protection,"
Trump said. "My administration is committed to advancing scientific
research that leads to a better understanding of our environment and of
environmental risks.
"As we do so, we should remember that rigorous science depends not on
ideology, but on a spirit of honest inquiry and robust debate."
There's very low morale among government scientists because science is under assault from this administration. Michael Mann
The US marches were some of the last to take place, following
hundreds across the world. A common theme among protesters was a worry
that politicians have rejected science-based policies.
"I'm encouraged by the marches I've seen already taking place around
the world," said Rush Holt, a former congressman and head of the
American Association for the Advancement of Science. "For generations
scientists have been reluctant to be in the public square. There is a
lot of concern."
Speakers in Washington included Christiana Figueres, the former
United Nations climate chief and climate scientist Michael Mann.
Hundreds of scientific institutions, environmental groups and union
groups partnered with the march.
"There's very low morale among government scientists because science is
under assault from this administration," Mann told the Guardian. "That
being said, events like this will lift the spirits of scientists. They
are finding a voice."
Pharmaceutical companies, concerned about the impact on research
talent of Trump's attempts to ban or restrict travel from certain
Muslim-majority countries, risked his wrath by supporting the march. In a
video, Pfizer said it was "proud to stand behind our scientists".
Trump has galvanized scientists with his comments about climate
change, which he has called a "hoax", as well as questions about whether
vaccines are safe and threats to cut funding to universities that displease him.
The White House's recent budget proposal would remove around $7bn
in science funding, with the National Institutes of Health, which funds
medical research, bearing much of the pain. Earth sciences, ranging
from weather satellites to marine research to coastal preservation, are
also lined up for severe cuts.
Climate change was at the heart of the March for Science, spurred on by dismissals of the issue by Trump and his top advisers. Budget director Mick Mulvaney has said climate research is a "waste of your money". Scott Pruitt, administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, has erroneously denied that carbon dioxide is a primary driver of global warming.Other areas of science have been all but abandoned. The president has yet to nominate administrators for Nasa and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, nor to appoint his own science adviser.
John Holdren, science adviser during Barack Obama's presidency, said Trump had "shown no indication of awareness of the role of science and the role of science in government".
"Scientists are understanding that they have to become activists, that they have to speak up, that they have to be heard," he said. "The message isn't, 'Please save our jobs.' Scientists would be in another line of work if they were just interested in their salaries. If funding for science is slashed, all of society will lose out."
The march has proved controversial within the science community, which is typically reluctant to be overtly political. Some scientists have raised concerns that the marches will invite attacks by Trump and his supporters, or will fail to convince the public that science has inherent value.
But several famous voices have joined the cause. "Science has always been political but we don't want science to be partisan," Bill Nye, a prominent engineer and TV personality, told the Guardian.
"Objective truths have become set aside and diminished and lawmakers are acting like a strong belief in something is as valid as careful peer review."
Nye said science was in a "dangerous place" but hoped the march would help nudge Trump to a more amenable position.
"The president changes his mind quite frequently," he said. "We want to influence the people who influence him. That's our goal for the march."
Leland Melvin, a former Nasa astronaut who participated in two missions, criticized the administration's plans to eliminate Nasa's education budget.
"Doing that would keep people like me from getting a masters or PhD," he said. "If we want brown people and women getting these degrees and get them involved in science, we have to fund it. The administration needs to get its head out of the sand."
Cristian Samper, president of the Wildlife Conservation Society, said the march aimed "to celebrate science, not to politicize it".
"Science is behind the good news and bad news about wildlife conservation ," he said. "it has nothing to do with the fake news. Science is the antithesis of fake news."
The marches came one week before the People's Climate March, a series of large-scale events focused on climate change that will be more overtly political.
"Attacks on science don't just hurt scientists, they hurt scientists' ability to protect the people, and climate change epitomizes that," said Dr Geoffrey Supran, an expert in renewable energy at Harvard University.
"When politicians cater to fossil fuel interests by denying the basic realities of climate science and pursuing anti-science climate policy, they endanger the jobs, justice, and livelihoods of ordinary people everywhere."
Politicians are getting away with flagrant dishonesty
as a shift from fact to opinion colours the political debate around
climate change, former Liberal leader John Hewson says.
Key points:
There's a a lack of evidence in public debate, John Hewson says
He says politicians either ignore climate change or attempt to use issue to score points
Australia has reached a point where facts are of lesser value than opinions, he says
Dr Hewson was speaking in the run-up to today's Global March
for Science, with gatherings taking place in 12 Australian cities and
towns as well as in Washington DC and other centres worldwide.
He
told AM he initially decided to get involved because he was concerned
about the "the lack of evidence being used as the basis of public
policy".
"I think science is probably more useful and more
relevant to society today than it's probably ever been. But there's been
a widening gap between science and the public," he said.
"We see
science funding being cut. We see, obviously, a lack of evidence in
public debate. We see attacks on scientists, as we've seen in the
climate change debate.
"And I think we need to stop and recognise
the significance of science and the importance of funding it properly
and using the evidence that it produces as the basis of good public
policy."
He said climate change was the most significant challenge
faced by society today, but said politicians were playing politics with
it.
"Our political process basically plays short-term politics with it, ignores it when it wants to, scores points on it," he said.
"None
of us would know that climate was an issue if the scientists hadn't
told us. You can't look out the window and see it's a problem.
"It's
non-climate scientists, for example, have to take the word of the
scientists. So it's easy for a small group to play politics.
"People
like John Howard in the past have admitted that they did deliberately
play short-term politics and they remain an agnostic when it comes to
climate. But you know, it's not a question of religion. It is a question
of science and scientific fact."
Asked if Australians were seeing "more flagrant dishonesty" from their politicians", he said "yes".
"Often
people say to me in the business community, for example: 'We can go to
jail for false and misleading behaviour. We have truth in advertising
laws. How come they don't apply to politics?'
"It's a pretty good question because of the extent to which we have got to this post-truth, fake news world.
"There's
a very significant shift, I think, away from fact to opinion. You make
up your own facts to back your argument. You quite often see that in
public debate.
"The whole debate has become seriously
distorted and misrepresented. And so, it's a bit of a plea, really —
let's go back to the evidence.
"Let's go back to the
significance of science in schools, in education, in funding it
properly, in recognising the value of it — the contribution that it can
and should make to our society."
