Science Under Attack
-
Rating:
/rating_on.png "1 Star")
/rating_off.png "5 Stars")
Loading ... - Published date: February 11, 2011
- Category: Science
- Tags: BBC, Science
- Comments: 3 (Comment on this post)
- TinyURL: http://www.truththeory.org/?p=3999
- Share:
Nobel Prize winner Sir Paul Nurse examines why science appears to be under attack, and why public trust in key scientific theories has been eroded – from the theory that man-made climate change is warming our planet, to the safety of GM food, or that HIV causes AIDS. He interviews scientists and campaigners from both sides of the climate change debate, and travels to New York to meet Tony, who has HIV but doesn’t believe that that the virus is responsible for AIDS. This is a passionate defence of the importance of scientific evidence and the power of experiment, and a look at what scientists themselves need to do to earn trust in controversial areas of science in the 21st century.
Comments on this post
Even though i like the end conclusion, that science (especially on subjects mentioned in this video)should be more open, i can´t help being left with the same feeling i have after seeing some “debunked” episode of something on discovery or what have we.
They tend to pick out a few points (the once most easy to ridicule, done in a nice tone here though)and debunk the whole “theory” on this basis …
Personally i think it was the GMO issue that was least covered … and only issues about the benfits of GMO and again ridicule because some ignorant mentioned that the person didn´t “want to eat food with genes in it!” … That is NOT AT ALL serious coverage.
I liked the guy, Paul Nurse (without the Sir
… but he didn´t seem to practice what he preach … so i´m guessing he didn´t have “free hands” from the Network who produced it.
Which is an everyday issue and the reason sites like truththeory.org is so important
Good point, it does not look like a serious documentary, interesting points, but poor depth in the subject!!!
I think it’s actually your own sensitivity to the GMO case rather than bias…
First of all, the actual film rotates around the climate change issue (approx. 3/4ths of the entire duration) and only uses the other controversies as “control cases” to draw a generalised conclusion. He even winked to us all with the “Origin of the species” twice on the film yet he did not say a word on the greatest politically and socially implicating scientific dispute of them all.
Not open enough? Give him a break, the guy stood there, calm and composed, listening to a bloke that held public conferences on why AIDS is caused by altered intestinal flora rather than HIV and indirectely incited his fellow humans to not seek medical treatment or worry about transmitting the disease to others.
Regarding GMOs, the “genes in my food” argument is actually quite eloquent, since it points out a basic force in society’s reluctance to adopt scientific advancement since the stone age: technophobia. Yes, there are some serious doubts and arguments both ways, but the vast majority of the media-guided drones of the western population have no idea whatsoever. They just replicate the “terrors” they are told. As a hint: look up what the general public thought of vaccines and the man himself at the times of Jenner.