Scientific American has a piece on the differing opinions between scientists and the rest of us on various issues (some political, some not).

The biggest gap that I am on the commoner side of things is world population (23 points). After that, it’s offshore drilling (20 points), vaccination requirements (18 points), and fracking (8 points). All of these are subject to nuance, however. It’s possible that on the world population question it could be hashed out over a beer into more agreement than a boolean answer allows for.

So where do y’all fall on the side of the commoner and against those pencilnecks in lab coats?


Category: Newsroom

About the Author


7 Responses to Scientists vs Commoners

  1. James Hanley says:

    I disagree with them on the effects of increasing world population, but then that’s a social scientific question that “scientists” (which without qualifier for some reason always means natural scientists) have been getting wrong for close to half a century now, at least since Garret Hardin’s 1968 article “The Tragedy of the Commons.” So, frankly, natural scientists’ opinion on that should be viewed as commoner opinion, not expert opinion.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

If you are interested in subscribing to new post notifications,
please enter your email address on this page.