Americans see science as lagging here

Both the American public and researchers have a high regard for scientific advancement. But they disagree over the standing of science in the U.S.

A full 84 percent of the public believes science's effect on society has been mostly positive, reveals a survey released Thursday by the Pew Research Center. And 70 percent feel scientists contribute a lot to society's well-being.

However, only 17 percent of the public think that U.S. scientific achievements rank as best in the world. That contrasts with 49 percent of scientists surveyed who feel U.S. science is still at the top compared with other countries.

Among the public, America's scientific prowess has declined over the past 10 years. In the current survey, only 27 percent of Americans cited scientific advancement as one of the country's most important achievements, compared with 47 percent in May 1999.

(Credit: Pew Research Center)

Scientists also have their own concerns. Among those surveyed, 85 percent see the public's lack of scientific knowledge as a major problem. Almost half criticize the public for having unrealistic expectations about scientific progress.

The media also shares in the blame, say scientists. About 48 percent of scientists say the news oversimplifies science. Newspaper coverage comes off best, with 36 percent of scientists rating it excellent or good. But TV coverage of science fares worse--only 15 percent of scientists see it as excellent or good.

(Credit: Pew Research Center)

The survey uncovered other differences in opinion between scientists and the public.

The majority of scientists firmly believe in evolution, with 87 percent saying humans and other living creatures have evolved over time through processes such as natural selection. Only 32 percent of the public believes the same.

A full 84 percent of scientists say global warming is the result of human actions, such as burning fossil fuel, while only 49 percent of the public agrees.

As part of the survey, the public was also quizzed on its knowledge of science, with mixed results. Fully 91 percent of those tested know that aspirin is used to prevent heart attacks. Around 82 percent said that GPS technology relies on satellites. But only 47 percent knew that lasers do not work by using sound waves, and a mere 46 percent remembered that electrons are smaller than atoms.

(Credit: Pew Research Center)

Pew's survey (PDF) of the general public targeted 2,001 adults by phone from April to June. The survey of scientists was conducted online in collaboration with the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and reached 2,533 members of the AAAS from May to June.

[wolivere]

Should it be a surprise? More and more off shoring spreading the wealth bell out, leaving fewer good jobs around.

When the US looks at its past, the US was very pro on its industry and science remaining at home.

[KyanWan]

I'm banging on my desk screaming "HEAR HEAR!" to this. Greedy folks - who happen to have been running the show - love to cry out about "national security" ----

then take our most vital people and throw them on the street, only to prop up nations like China and India on our technology ... and trash our country for a quick buck.

It's a shame.

[JoeF2]

It always amazes me that people like you blame off-shoring when they should blame their own shortcomings.
Get off your behind and get an education. More than half of graduate students in the sciences in the US are from abroad. Science is hard. Seems people like you don't want to learn, but rather want to get money without earning it.
So, stop the whining and get off the couch.

[Lerianis3]

Excuse me, but the only reason that half of graduate students in the sciences are from overseas/abroad is because it is too damned expensive for an American to pay their way through college to get a science degree from a college.
You are forgetting that most of those people 'coming from abroad' are having everything paid for them by some jackass business..... if they did that for AMERICAN students.... well, I bet you would see a ******** more Americans getting science degrees.

[-fjtorres-]

Depends on what you define as "science" and who you ask.
If you mean hard science and engineering the answer is absolutely: Y-E-S!!

If you mean the touchy-feelie "socially-relevant" science, we lead the universe.
Junk science, politically motivated or politically connected stuff; nobody produces as much as American Academia.

Meanwhile, meaningful research in hard sciences is steadily being starved of even the pittance it used to get. And the trends run the wrong way; more junk, less jewels.

[celticbrewer]

Amen. What constitutes a scientist these days?

And can we really believe them when they publish a study? It seems 6 months after a "breakthrough" study, some other group publishes their own with opposite conclusions.

"A full 84 percent of scientists say global warming is the result of human actions" - which any rational person knows is untrue. But, let's ask this- how many of those 84% are climatologists? None, perhaps? Thier opinion is just as valid as a Climatologist's stance on genetic modification.

Again, we see that it's these BS statistics that people love so much that's causing most of the problem. 30 second sound bytes and flashy graphics feed the majority of morons in this country. Don't get me wrong- we have some of the brightest people in the world in our country, and we also have clueless idiots- but that has always been the case.

[HolmeSweetHolme]

All science of value will eventually become socially relevant. Your complaint sounds as if was motivated by narrow-minded political concerns- kind of like you're one of the sad majority of Americans that doesn't believe in evolution nor in anthropogenic source/causes of global warming. In answer to "celticbrewer" I ask by how he/she defines "rational person" and assuming that they include themselves in that definition to then provide a rationale for how dumping billions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere, year after year, for decades (almost a century now) could possibly *not* have an adverse effect on the world's climate? And just so you know, by far most climatologists (well above 90%) accept that our current global warming trend is at least in part, if not for the most part, caused by man's actions polluting the atmosphere. Both of you guys/gals need to get out more, really, read a book or something.

[Markus155]

celticbrewer: I'm not understanding your rejection to the statistics about global warming?

From what I understood from the article, this was a poll - and the results were more of what the scientists BELIEVE, not what they can prove. They don't have to be a climatologist to give their opinion or voice their belief. Would one have to be a priest/pastor or rabbi or imam to say one believes God exists?

If you read the preceeding sentence before the quoted statistics you don't believe, it stated, "The survey uncovered other differences in opinion between scientists and the public."

"Opinion", is the key word here. More of the scientists polled (84%) believe we humans are the major factor involved in global warming, whereas only 49% of the general public (us non-scientists) believe that.

So the statistics aren't about scientific facts or the difference between rational an irrational people, it's all about opinions and beliefs. I for one am one of the 49% that believe we humans are screwing up the environment for our own gains and nature be damned. Obviously, celticbrewer is of the 51% that feels this is all just nature taking its course, and any warnings of what we humans are doing to the environment is just "liberal alarmist propaganda"! ;-)

[JoeF2]

@celticbrewer:
"A full 84 percent of scientists say global warming is the result of human actions" - which any rational person knows is untrue."

Actually, only ignoramuses like you think it is wrong.
It is people like you who claim they are "rational" who in reality are lacking an education.

[Lerianis3]

by JoeF2 July 10, 2009 4:17 PM PDT
@celticbrewer:
"A full 84 percent of scientists say global warming is the result of human actions" - which any rational person knows is untrue."

Actually, only ignoramuses like you think it is wrong.
It is people like you who claim they are "rational" who in reality are lacking an education.
________________________________________

WRONG! There are plenty of scientists now who are coming out and BLUNTLY saying that man-made global warming is bunk, and the 'global warming' we are having now is NORMAL VARIATION IN A CHAOTIC SYSTEM, namely.... WEATHER! (sing that word in caps with me)
Weather and temperature are CHAOTIC SYSTEMS.... they can vary a HELL of a lot from day to day. I mean, in my area in the MIDDLE OF THE FREAKING WINTER, it was nearly 90 degrees one day.... they are still trying to explain that because even with global warming, there is no reason it should have gotten that warm on that day.

[solitare_pax]

The problem is, too many colleges insisting that students take a huge load of non-essential courses that are irrelevant to their chosen field of study, too many good middle class jobs being outsourced overseas while CEOs rake in obscene salaries, and too many political luddites who are upset that science reveals some very inconvenient facts for their pork-barrel projects.

[CrimsonCantab]

So what you're saying is, college students should only take classes related directly to their major? So, for example, a history major will have NO exposure to physics, computer science, or biology? Doesn't sound like the best plan to get everyone interested in science.

[solitare_pax]

No, I am observing that some constantly required courses are irrelevant for one trying to make a living or working in a field. One requiored course of foreign language? What good does that do you, especially if you never go to the a place that speaks the language. A lone course in theater? Either you can act or you don't want to. Same for art or music. Some things, like writing, math and science you should take to understand to understand how the world works, and they have practical real-world applications.

But as a history major myself, I have yet to discover a practical use for the general education courses I took in geology, botany, and applied statistical analysis in the real world. Had it not been for that and a score of other general education requirements I would have taken practical courses in business administration and done a dual major. Instead I am playing catch-up with online courses to fill in what the real-world college left out.

[renGek]

Thats an extremely narrow minded view and is typical of people who only wants immediate gratification. I'll give you a prime example. I studied computer science in college and my school had a heavy emphasis on well rounded education beyond your major through liberal arts and foreign language is one of them. I took French. Beyond the fact that I used it in travel, one year I interview with a company for a job whose main customer was based in paris. They hired me over other smarter engineers because my knowledge of french was the tie breaker skill set. In that job, the customer met with me and over time ended up trusting more than other developers because of my ability to communicate with them.

I have many other examples just like that. I have worked with many many engineers that don't have this background and I can tell you they all lack vital skills thinking beyond the norm in terms of social skills, communication skills and real world problem understanding beyond linear situations of x+y=z. Once it is something that cannot be easily defined they are lost.

[wolivere]

As one history major to another.

You have not found a use for those studies? wow....

[istill316]

See, I think you've got it backwards. The great problem in our society today is that our students don't learn their history, art, music, literature, mathematics, physics, biology, etc. Well-rounded individuals are the ones who produce the best results. Look at the famous scientists of the past: Leonardo DaVinci, Thomas Edison, Rene DeCartes, etc. They worked in many many fields. The key to their success was lack of specialization.

[gsigas]

It depends on the kind of institution you attend. There are trade schools and technical schools that focus on specific skills to do a job or enter a career and then there are liberal arts colleges that focus on providing a student with a broad base of knowledge and with basic skills related to self-teaching. It is a difference of purpose, the trade school is interested in training someone to perform a task or fulfill a role while the liberal arts college is interested in training someone how to organize, accumulate, produce and apply knowledge in general with extra focus on a specific field. If you want to train primarily for a job or skill go to a technical or trade school, if you want to train your ability to teach yourself, to communicate effectively and to think formally/critically then go to a liberal arts college. It should be noted that some trade schools (ex. medical school, law school, business school) prefer you to already have these skills before attending.

[istill316]

That's true about trade and technical schools, but the problem is the major universities like the Big Ten that are supposed to be better than that, and yet aren't.

[birdtford]

This is a response to soitare_pax regarding those "required courses" you had to take. I had to do the same when I was in collage. But luckily one of the courses for my field was taught by the head of the department. Several of us questioned him about those "required courses". His answer was that when the administration meets to decide on what classes must be taken for a degree. The departments that are not the popular ones will insist that one or some of there classes be taken, no matter if it is relevant to the degree or not. This is how they can justify their departments existence.

[Markus155]

Sometimes, those "irrelevant required courses" can be beneficial (as in the case of renGek), but yet in the case of solitare_pax, his/her required course workload prevented him/her from obtaining skills one could have gained from other courses more relevant to what he/she was aiming for in the workplace. I can tell you for a fact that my brother - having received a Bachelor's of Science degree in computers - had to take (and re-take) a statistics course (as well as a bunch of other "required" courses) that he has as yet, in the past 25-30 years in the IT industry, to utilize in ANY way, shape or form. He too felt as though they were useless courses that had no impact on his work history. In fact, it was "extra curricular education" that he gained from working off-campus part-time for IBM and with a tech engineer (working on computer hardware components, rebuilding PCs, etc.) is what ultimately helped him the most in his career.

Perhaps what colleges could do is find the most critical classes one would need for their chosen degree, then leave the rest as "open credits" that one would have to fill - in which case you can choose to add a foreign language or two, add business admin. courses, philosophy, various "liberal arts" courses, etc. Perhaps design the curriculum so that EVERY student would have a Major and Minor course of study in order to gain a bachelor's degree.

It also wouldn't hurt to push for more apprenticeships in America. All the way up to the end of the 19th century, most "higher education" for practical purposes was getting an apprenticeship with a craftsman and learning as you worked (ie - blacksmith, wrangler, herder, carpenter, bartender, etc.)

Perhaps we should use some of that economic stimulus money to give incentives to American corporations/industry for paid apprenticeships to put AMERICANS back to work! Both sides would benefit: companies get a whole ton of moolah (from stimulus money and tax breaks) and Americans go back to work - sounds like a win-win situation to me! ;-)

[GODISMYSHADOW]

For the sciences and even for manufacturing, it's important to be on the metric system.
The United States is using a mix of measurements right now, but public momentum for
metrication has been lost. Not being on the metric system can make it more expensive
to manufacture things in the U.S. A larger inventory of tooling might be required if you
insist on using customary units. That's one reason so many things we buy are made
elsewhere, like China or Mexico. It's not just the cost of labor.

Americans spend too many hours in front of TV getting mesmerized instead of doing
something productive. Newton Minow called it a "Vast Wasteland." How can they
ever become good at science and mathematics if they're watching TV all the time?

Americans might have some health issues. Too many live on junk food and don't get
enough exercise. Diabetes is too common. How can they ever become good at
scence and mathematics if they're sick?

[monkeyfun14]

US does have a quite a few bit of scientific advances but most of these seem to be used in the military.

[wolivere]

Military always makes science go faster. But even with that you would be surprised at how much is foreign purchased.

[kellymcgowan]

Are we surprised when almost all universities and colleges have killed academic scholarships in favor of sports and financial aid ones.

[istill316]

Good point.

[biffhenerson]

People?s uneducated opinions hardly make fact. The fact is that the U.S. invests more in science and technology research than anywhere on earth. The fact is that the technology in defense, aerospace, manufacturing, medicine, etc. is far superior to anywhere on earth. Oh yea some country may have a better mouse trap or telephone, but for the most part the overall leader is the U.S. Ask the same question of a typical guy off the street and you will get the results of the survey. Ask them where Colorado is on a map or who the Vice President is and you will get worse results.

[-fjtorres-]

The question isn't what you spend but what you get.
And what we get is nowhere near what we should be getting.
A b-list tv star comes down with an obscure disease and congress is all over it while research into the real killer diseases starves for cash; we spend zillions on a fruitless international plasma fusion experiment while the most-promising near-term approach runs paycheck to paycheck begging for contributions.
Trusting the judgment of politicians is what got us into this mess to start with and its only going to get worse now that all fields have been politicized.

[wolivere]

Defense the US is lagging behind Germany Sweden and many others in various sectors not in over all numbers but in technology.
Aerospace Dito, the us is taking a huge butt kicking in this field
Manufacturing? the US is way out on that being bested in so many ways its not funny
Medicine? lots of patents yes in the US, but the US is interested only in patents on drugs that make money, real medical science is still the realm of more liberal social nations. They often come to the US for easy patents and marketing but research and break through is still often an over seas accomplishment.

Now US investment has typically been study purchase patent. Even in research, the US has been really poor at home grown talent, instead of going to countries like England, France, Canada, India, and siphoning off top talent from there socially backed education systems.

[Lerianis3]

Excuse me, wolivere, but most of the 'manufacturing advances' were made here in the UNITED STATES first! They are using over in China and other places stuff that we made up YEARS if not DECADES ago, with some very MINOR improvements as the United States advances technology further and further along.

[biffhenerson]

I've been to Japan, they eat really crappy food with wooden sticks. I'm not impressed.

[-fjtorres-]

The country has ten times the number of lawyers any civilized society could need and one-tenth the number of engineers we need. Everybody wants to be a rockstar or rapper; nobody wants to be a scientist or educator.
The country has a strong anti-intellectual bent so scientists and engineers are geeks (look up the origins of the word, folks!) and nerds while child-molesting sickos get state funerals and wall-to-wall media coverage.
We've been living off other countries' brain for a couple decades now by importing *their* PhDs and engineers and doctors.
And now the oh-so-wise masses want to cut back on immigrants.
Joy!

[ExWinUser]

Your talking about Elvis and the Catholic church right?

[wolivere]

The 70's and 80's saw a lot of Bussiness money counters come out.

Thus today we see all the fun white collar crime and off shoring.

[istill316]

Don't worry, once Obamacare passes it'll be economically insensible to be a doctor. They'll all become lawyers instead to fight back. Beware the age of the lawyers (unless you're a lawyer)!

[Lerianis3]

This country has ten times the number of lawyers because we have ten times the number of unnecessary laws compared to other countries around the world. THAT is why we need so many lawyers, paralegals, etc. in this country: because we need that many to defend people from time in prison for simply DARING to put something into their bodies that the over-moral bastards in this country don't want them to put into their bodies (i.e. 'illegal' drugs).

[sodablue]

Funny... Lot's of ignorante statements right here in the comments. :-)

[The_happy_switcher]

That's pretty funny coming from someone who can't spell 'ignorant.'

[The_happy_switcher]

America is a country of nitwits. Just go to youtube and punch in Jay Walking with Jay Leno and you'll see for yourself. One guy, a recent college grad, was asked: "who was the first president of the U.S.?" Didn't know the answer. Then, the interviewer gave a hint: "he's on the one dollar bill"--he still didn't know the answer.

[monkeyfun14]

Has it ever occurred to you that maybe that this was rehearsed?

[The_happy_switcher]

A quick look on Wiki/google suggests it's not rehearsed. Do they cherry pick the answers?--obviously, yes. But it doesn't change the fact that the educational system of this country is letting it's students down.

[JeffKni]

...Because we're the only country with idiots? One guy (or a handful of people) does not represent the whole population. I hate to break it to you but dumb is everywhere.

[HolmeSweetHolme]

I think the students in the US are letting themselves down. Real knowledge is not prized by most young Americans- they have their iPhones and computers and are watching videos on YouTube or LOLing away on Facebook and Twitter. Instead of learning to play real musical instruments they play Guitar Hero and Rock Band. Being smart and getting good grades is social suicide in most US high schools, and many colleges. There is plenty out there for those who want to engage- it's just that most of them don't want to engage, and they hate to hear that they are lame ignoramuses (ok I can't spell). The Jay Leno "Jay Walking" is a perfect example- these people think they're so smart, knowing the latest gossip on TMZ, but they have never heard of Iran. What rock do you have to ensconce yourself under to have never heard of Iran, or George Washington? It goes beyond stupidity into willful idiocy, and eventually we will pay with a loss of economic prosperity in the US.

[istill316]

Oh it's definitely not rehearsed, and even if it were, see Sean Hannity's "Man on the Street" interviews for the same issue. We've got lots of dumb people in this country, since our education system only teaches blind acceptance of moral debauchery instead of actual useful things, like how to think logically!

[birdtford]

"The_happy_switcher" you are basing your statement that "America is a country of nitwits" on a Youtube video. Wow, with that deduction, you must have an IQ of 200, oops, I meant 2!

[The_happy_switcher]

@bird:No, I also base it on my interactions with people such as yourself.

[The_happy_switcher]

@bird: Also, for a guy who can't even spell 'college' (spelled collage, according to an earlier post by you), you're hardly in a position to be questioning my IQ. You may want to ask your 'collage' for a refund.

[JoeF2]

@istill316:
" since our education system only teaches blind acceptance of moral debauchery instead of actual useful things, like how to think logically!"

Since you are referring to Hannity, if people would know to think logically they would not fall for the logical fallacies that you can see every night on Hannity, O'Reilly, and Limbaugh...

[Naxilo]

I'm aware of the scientific, medical ,etc. Advances that we've made in the country. Frankly I say Not good enough.
Cell phones, vehicles, public transportation, game consoles, computers, and more. We should be on top of the game on all of these things. It's pathetic enough that we even took so long debating the stem cell issue alone.

[wolivere]

Cell phones... off shore IPOD not bad but still small niche in market
Vehicles off shore
public transportation off shore
game consoles Xbox good :)

[skippybass]

The other posts seem to ask "What's wrong with our country?" but I want to ask "Is there anything wrong with this survey?" Who were those 2001 members of the general public? Was this truly a random sampling. It seems like rather a small number - especially compared to the number of scientists they managed to survey. For example, did they call people up and then categorize them as scientists versus non-scientists ? If so, that would really skew the results.

[birdtford]

Most intelligent comment yet

[renGek]

This is no surprise as a vast majority of people in this country are dumb as a rock. The only way they pass in school is because the school system have over the years continually dropped test requirements. They can tell you what paris hilton wore last week but good luck getting an answer about who their senators are.

Popular u.s. culture continues to dumb us down and we are more than happy about it and they strive to make science to be an unattractive career choice (in terms of sex appeal). I bet if tv shows continually show engineers are skinny leggy blondes or ripped 6 pack studs over and over, everybody will want to be an engineer.

Then there are the religious morons who don't want you to believe in science of any kind because its evil in the eyes of their god. So they enforce their brand of education on entire counties.

Right now a small portion of this country comprises of the entire science community for the whole country. Its very sad. Makes you wonder what the vast majority of the losers in this country is suppose to do in the next 25 years.

[istill316]

"The religious morons" are some of the few that actually know things.

[mrcoolg]

Know things like the universe was created in 7 days, and the world is only 6000 years old? Thank goodness only a "few" people know these things.

[JoeF2]

@ istill316:
Like what? That the earth is 6000 years old???
I see these religious morons trying to push Creationism, nowadays disguised as "Intelligent Design", into school curriculums. That's one of the biggest threats to an actual science education.

[Lerianis3]

by istill316 July 10, 2009 11:26 AM PDT
"The religious morons" are some of the few that actually know things.
_________________________________

No, they aren't. They did a study that looked at private schools compared to public schools a few years ago, and it was published in USA Today...... WHOA MAMA! The private school children knew MUCH less than even the public school children did.

Though really, pulling 'facts' and 'historical figures' out of your head is NOT THE FREAKING SAME AS BEING SMART! That is just 'memorization and regurgitation', which is NOT A SIGN OF INTELLIGENCE! Hell, that's like training a monkey to push certain buttons on a machine and saying the monkey is smart enough to 'operate' the machine..... yeah, because that's ALL HE KNOWS!

I'd really like them to realize that the REAL problem is that we are expecting people to 'remember' things that they DON'T USE IN THEIR DAILY LIVES! I don't remember 90% of what I 'learned' in school because I SIMPLY DO NOT USE IT IN MY DAY TO DAY LIFE!

[globalist_agenda]

Polls prove nothing, they are just a propaganda tool. Let's see PEW run a poll asking Americans over age 40 if they think life in America is better today than it was 20 years ago. My poll says 90% say no. You can't even walk around San Francisco wearing a red sweater unless you want to get shot by MS-13 gang members.

[Lerianis3]

Bull. You could have that done to you if you wore 'gang colors' back in the 60's, so don't push that bullcrap!
The fact is that I have walked around Baltimore wearing 'gang colors' without even realizing it before and I had NO problems.

[KyanWan]

Ok.

As someone who DOES work in math/sciences ( Does "Computer Science" count as sciences? ) ---- I have a question.

Thinking about this a bit, for the common man to have such trivial information as asked in the above poll under their belt - what good does this do the scientific community?

Really, if someone knows more about the guts of the computer systems I design and work on, the applications I make, the solutions I design - what good will it do me?

I tell you what good - we'll have more haphazard products out there, more "I CAN DO IT!" people who make insecure applications, shoddy websites ...

oh wait, that's the internet.

Don't we all love these do-it-yourself things that have popped up all over the place?

I've seen what bringing the regular person into the sciences does. It's not pretty - you're looking at it now.

The quality degrades, the research degrades, the products degrade. ( US & Euro programming => India. The work is not equal. I see it, I know it. ) Gone are the days of the pharmacist being the snake-oil salesman hawking sugar water on the corner. Why? Because our people have advanced past such simplicities. We should leave the sciences for those who have the intellect, the passion for their field --- and discover it. We should encourage, but not broaden it. We need quality - excellence - perfection - not quantity.

The higher the quantity, the lower the quality. It's simple, really. Look to the marketplace. What is the best - the mass made good, or the handcrafted?

( Or is the problem that I don't receive public dollars to do my work - and I haven't see the "light"?)

Be careful what you wish for - that's what I'll close on.

[HolmeSweetHolme]

I think the problem is that many Americans do not value the contributions of science, nor do they see scientific/engineering endeavors- let's call them "rationalist" endeavors- as being related to one another through the application of rigorous empirical observation. Rigorous empirical observation expresses itself in industry as rigorous design and testing- the things that make products great. "Getting to the bottom of it all" is a relatively new thing in the world, and it has dramatically transformed all of our lives. But the average American thinks he can use a cell phone, take a vaccine, and still deny evolution or global warming, without realizing how intertwined all of things are because they are all the products of rigorous empiricism. The hope is that basic scientific education, and learning about the history of great scientific discoveries, will lead to a population that actually does value these things beyond just being able to call their friends from anywhere; to value the contribution of stem cell research before they come down with Parkinson's disease. I agree that only qualified professionals should do this work- and in answer to an earlier post, all of these fields have advanced to point that only the most gifted of generalists could contribute, it usually requires specialization to be able to do the work- but the fact the most people seem to be willfully ignorant, and damned proud of it, it really distressing. They do not, and cannot, truly value science because they don't really know what it is. Teaching them what it is can only make for a better world.

[sharmajunior]

This is isn't a surprise to anyone. Look at those people who are "still clinching to their guns and bibles". They don't believe in science, atleast not to the extent that the rest of the world believes in. therfore there's no need to study science.

What kind of a logic is that. I know a few good scientists who are both scientific and have a faith and keep them both separate. When both start to mix, that's when you get these morons.

[ww2009]

The very word "believe" is at the crux of the problem. Why should anyone want to "work" to get at the truth when the "marching morons" (Omni Mag, Circa 1980) can "believe" the truth to be whatever someone tells them it is...AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaagggggggggggggggggggggggg!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[deloprator20000]

What the general public really dislikes is that science values Truth higher than public opinion. Public Opinion can sincerely believe that 2+2 = 8, but it won't make it true. Public Opinion can sincerely believe that the big bang never occurred, but it won't make it true.

The problem is that when emotions and intuition trump reason and intellect, what matters most isn't whether something is true or not, or at least close to truth. NO, what matters most is how you feel about something and whether you expressed your opinion sincerely, the self triumphs over the truth. In this milieu, Interpersonal relationships completely substitute independent thought, why spend your time studying math or science when it's interpersonal relationships are valued higher than truth, hence higher than math or science.

In this outlook when an opinion is shown to be false or ill-informed people take it personally, as if a scientific theory has a personal vendetta against one person. So, I say to the general public: Just as in the Godfather; it's not personal, it's simply science.

[ddhboy]

I think the problem is that there isn't anything tangible to attach to scientific advancement. People neglect their phones and computers as representing advancement because they've come to expect these things to be everything machines, while in the past you had some very big blips that pointed towards scientific development, including the atomic bomb, Apollo 11, and the invention of the internet. Now it just seems like technology is running in the motions of gradual improvement, and I don't think people will be as stimulated by science until there's some big advancement again like an android that crosses the uncanny valley, or really cheap powerful solar panels or a cure for some form of cancer or something like that.

[ReasonableGuy]

You pursue what you value. In the U.S. we value: Athletes and Actors and "businessmen."

You can foolishly ignore the facts and purposefully remain ignorant of the scientific method and theories. You can believe that God wants you to be ignorant and not use your brain. You can believe in horoscopes. You can ignore the evidence that irrefutably shows our planet is warming excessively. You can pretend that the unrestrained growth in human population and use of fossilized carbon fuels has no impact. You can pretend you understand our systems of measurement and proclaim that the metric system is too hard (when, of course, it is much easier).

You can believe whatever nonsense you want, and you can still be an Athlete or an Actor or a Talk-show pundit (a subset of actors?) or an investment banker or a politician.

Science is wonderful. But our schools and our culture lead too many to ignore it and misunderstand it. Most journalists have no scientific background. Few legislators have science or engineering degrees.

We have had a wonderful run with science. But I won't be surprised when India and China surpass us. Even now, we rely on immigrants to keep our Science and Engineering knowledge advancing. If you categorized working scientists and engineers by their birth nations, or their parents birth nations, you would find that the United States is not the leading nation in raising scientists and engineers.

America the land that rewards Athletes and Actors (and sleaze-ball investment bankers) but not Scientists and Engineers.

[Lerianis3]

Seeing as how those Athletes are putting their bodies on the line and taking the chance that they will be paralyzed, have debilitating injuries everyday, etc..... I think that they deserve to be rewarded highly. That's just a bunch of 'jealousy' being put out there by you, UNReasonableGuy.

We do reward scientists and engineers in this country. They are paid VERY well for what they do, usually to the tune of 50K a year or more.

[MucousIsFun]

Personally after being in biomedical research for several years now I think that the disparity between the scientific community and society at large is a combination of poor / outdated science education and even poorer media portrayal. Admittedly my Economics side of me recognizes the cost-benefit structure that tends to tilt media (and by media I generally mean news outlets, both traditional and internet based) toward more "hype" items like a death of a celebrity or the outcome of a sport game, but that doesn't dispute the issue that most people don't recognize what has been done recently, what is being done, and what's coming soon.

Just from the biomedical field there have been bold discoveries in even the typical "popular" fields of biomedicine such as HIV, Cancer, and stem cells that they don't hear about. For example, I bet that most people don't know that there is a population of Europeans (of generally swedish descent) that are immune to HIV. There was a vaccine designed around that discovery. Yet within the scientific community that's really really old news. That discovery was made about 10-15 years ago. All people really hear about disease and interesting things like stem cells are the things that are "huge" discoveries like "gardisil" the hpv vaccine or how yet another drug is recalled.

Personally, I think there are many fascinating things about science that are not even talked about. I know some scientists would think that oversimplicity is bad for science overall, but there is some merit to interesting someone with very little understanding with something that is truly cutting edge. I recently visited my old high school to see what they're still teaching, and people talk about DNA as if it's really the most fascinating thing that biology has to offer. I mean hot topics that people don't really get to hear about like a nasal spray that will prevent you from dying in a bioterrorism attack, cancer vaccines, radio-signal drug targeting, microchip infection detectors, or the medical "smart house" (a personal favorite of mine). People are working on things that, I guess someone could call frivolous, but at least it is interesting. Most of the time I know people working their ***** off on these things just out of curiosity. I only know of a few people who do it for truly "political / financial" reasons.

I recognize that few people may think that these ideas are as fascinating as I do, but I think if people get a more frequent dose on what scientists are doing now a days, they wouldn't think that there have been so few achievements. Personally I don't get why people aren't getting stoked about this "smart bandaid" that can tell what sort of bug is infecting your wound *and* it can transmit the data to your personal computer which will pump out what you should do. I mean I think people don't even realize that a lot of their drugs are made in E. coli. Bacteria are the new factories in a lot of biology-related products.

You put in your blueprint (DNA) and E. coli pops out your product. I mean the typical example that pops into my head is Insulin for diabetics.

But I digress. I think if people got a bigger taste of what's being done, there wouldn't be such a disparity. At least in the knowledge gap. I personally don't mind people thinking that there exists research that is frivolous to them, but if they at least knew about it they could decide for themselves rather than letting a politician or some media pundit tell you it is.

[ww2009]

ReasonableGuy has it correct. You get what you pay for. Why would anyone want to encourage their kids to go into a field where their future requires them to complete with a billion other people for sub-minimum wage? Not me. I am a scientist - perhaps the last of a dying breed. I teach my daughters to think like scientists and analyse the situations to which they are exposed. When the time comes, they will make the correct career decision. They will have the scientific upbringing. But, I will most likely be steering them away from anything that is not a "shingle" profession.
If America really wants to invest in it's future, it needs to reward scientists. Not by outsourcing science, but by creating centers for research and rewarding scientists with higher salaries and long term contracts. When you look at the "job creation for the next 20 years" news you will not find real science listed anywhere. Without the demand for scientists, discovery will vanish from the landscape and our country will be religated to the scrapheap of history. Shameful!!!!!!

[JoeF2]

"Why would anyone want to encourage their kids to go into a field where their future requires them to complete with a billion other people for sub-minimum wage?"

Except that you got it completely wrong.
They won't compete with a billion other people if they have a decent science education.
They would compete with billions of other people if they haven't learned anything more than flipping burgers.
You claim you are a scientist??? Your post disproves that. Your post shows that you don't know much about science.

[Lerianis3]

Actually, JoeF2, if everyone was getting science degrees... yeah, they would be competing with other people for sub-minimum wage!
The fact is also that SOME PEOPLE JUST ARE NOT MEANT FOR HIGHER EDUCATION. That's a bottom line, SHUT THE F UP thing that is simply TRUE!
I know quite a few people who were not 'college material', never will be, and realized that when they were back in high school with myself.

The fact is also that a college degree does NOT make you intelligent. Heck, it took me until 26 to get a college degree, and I have a VERIFIED IQ of 150+.
We would be better to realize that college and 'higher education' today has turned into memorization and regurgitation, outside of a VERY FEW CLASSES such as math, and started trying to change that because most people are NOT good at memorization and regurgitation.