Americans Have Little Faith In Scientists

How much faith do Americans have in scientists and science journalists? Not a whole lot, a new survey finds.In a new HuffPost/YouGov poll, only 36 percent of Americans reported having "a lot" of trust that information they get from scientists is accurate and reliable. Fifty-one percent said they trust that information only a little, and another 6 percent said they don't trust it at all.

I'm honestly kind of surprised the number of people who trust them is that low.

Saw it but didn't post it since I don't trust "HuffPost/YouGov" polls.

Why do you distrust them?

Scrutinize everything.

It's understandable that they make think that way because they're not actually reading "science journals", they're reading science articles in mainstream journals which really are mostly bunk and useless.

Well,

1. How can you trust a poll you can't see? https://today.yougov.com/news/2013/12/09/poll-results-science/ (joking, or am I?)
2. HuffPost/YouGov polls respondent come from those who have internet access which can skew the results according to the demographics of those who are more likely to have internet access. Polling organizations like Gallup or The Pew Research Center interview persons using cellphones/ land lines.

If America had any faith in scientists we would be a lot healthier

I'm sure they are probably talking about global warming and such, but when I think scientist, I think pharmaceuticals and I would be surprised if anyone really trusts them.

The poll is based on people who answer phone calls from 800 numbers at 2 PM on a weekday. I wouldn't say that's representative of the general population.

I kinda doubt this, once you make unhealthy food (which is usually far tastier than the healthy alternative) such an accessible option trusting scientists isn't really the issue anymore. Instead the problem is people love to indulge in not only the tasty stuff, but the stuff that is easy to come by.

Well no shit people have little faith in scientists. They have had 20 years of millions of dollars of funding and they have yet to cure most of the deadly cancers.

how many Americans actually read scientific journals?

I trust in Phil Robertson.

People aren't supposed to have "faith" in science/scientists. They are supposed to question and investigate their findings to find out that they are in fact true.

Because every cancer is individual to the person who has it. No two cancers are consistent in all factors.

There is no 'cure'. There are ways to treat people individually.

Never stop questioning your universe. One day scientists are telling you electrons exist in orbits around the nucleus then all of a sudden they are just things dependent on probability that only exist in s and p orbitals. What science says is truth isn't something everyone has to agree with.

in fact it's probably better for science because then it could make scientists strive for better and more refined answers.

How's your cure to cancer coming along then?

I don't have millions of dollars as yearly funding nor am I specialized in biology and medicine, but it's fair to say that if the only treatments we have at the moment which we've had for over 20 years are chemo and radiotherapy, then those millions of dollars given to cancer research have gone to waste.

-Implying that all cancers are the same

-Not understanding the nature of cancer

-Ignoring that cancer survival rates have increased

-Being a dense bundle of sticks

considering just about half the country thinks the universe is 6000 years old, they arent far off

Didn't scientists say a certain type of oil we cook our food in was bad and then when almost the entire nation adopted a different oil as the standard it was shown to be worse than the one we were using?

On topic. I don't exactly distrust scientists but I believe everyone has a motive. It's hard to believe anybody is actually looking out for me when everything is so politicized.

It is surprising since America dominates the world in science.

>I ever said all cancers are the same

>I dont understand the nature of cancer and it changes nothing in this discussion

>Survival rates matter at all when discussion the same 2 archaic treatments used since forever

>Using insults because you have no proper arguing skills. Bye Bye

Here, educate yourself. http://www.slate.com/blogs/quora/2013/02/07/where_do_the_millions_of_cancer_research_dollars_go_every_year.html

Time is relative. We base "time" on how the earth moves. The universe has no beginning or end, so on a universal level, time is meaningless. Any arbitrary number on the age of the universe is patently false.

i think my comment went over your head or youre being purposefulyl dense

@RadecSupreme: The point here is that cancer is not easy to cure by any means at all. If it was, we would've found the cure already.

they don't believe in it because it a trick by the debbil!

It seems you're mixing up two different situations here in your text: Additional information achieved at a later date (through additional testing in the case of trans fats, which is what I assume you're referring to), and willful misinformation by the scientific community at large (which seems to be your allusion in your second paragraph).

There will always flawed or incomplete information that is later corrected or made more robust as we build out scientific knowledge base, but to use that as a basis for mistrusting the scientific community at large (at least to point of ignoring evidence for things like evolution, the age of the Earth, and climate change as many do) is rather absurd.

Society should be skeptical of the scientific community in that peers should continue to gather information and reevaluate scientific conclusions against the new data (that's, after all, what furthers scientific knowledge), but I fear that's not what most of these people are referring to.

Meh... I would've answered with the majority on the poll so good for the majority. :D

Science is a wonderfully beautiful thing. Every living being should love science. No matter what your religious belief is, you should love and care about science. Science has done a great many thing for man.

...shocking

I know, right? >_>

While some you are probably thinking their mistrust is based on anti-science religious beliefs, in all reality it probably has less to do with religion and more to do with basic distrust with the government. After all, there are people out there who think the government created AIDS to kill black people and homosexuals, people who think we already cured so called incurable diseases and hold back the cure from public use so Big Pharma can profit from lifelong treatment of sick people, and more.

@ad1x2: don't be afraid of the gov so much

you're self centered on top of being fucking stupid, nobody gives two shits about what you think.

For a couple million I would also sign off on the benefits of hfcs. Science became a farce back in the 70s.

Why would I be? I work for them.

I'm just repeating some of the conspiracy theories out there that make people distrust what they are told by Uncle Sam.

I trust in science that has a lot of support and public documents to back it up. I do lots of Science reading, and just reading listed facts about things does not cut it without any depth. Right now I have a lot of faith in Graphene tech and very excited to see how much the world will change with faster computers to calculate things.

Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make him stupid... >_>

actually when they disagree with me and says stupid things, like you saying evolution is rubbish, it makes you stupid. You say stupid things all the time. People call you on it all the time but you don't seem to put 2 and 2 together.

going on welfare while opposing others using it makes you a selfish scummy person.

In this case, I'd say that it is just indicative of a mental disability - i.e., the one he was on disability pay for.

No your just a closed minded fool who is unable to look at alternative views and the bigger picture, a drone. Herp fucking derp he is disagreeing what Iv been taught at school, so he's stupid!

That's because we have yet to have flying cars like the 80s promised.

@one_plum: Funny thing is even if we had the technology to have flying cars I can almost guarantee that 9/11 would be cause enough for the government to ban them. Especially with the whole packing it full of explosives and crashing it into a government building possibility.

These "alternative views" you speak of are views that essentially deny basic facts of life that we as a species have discovered over thousands of years of existence. These things aren't just taught in school because they make for good stories, they are taught because mankinds endless quest for knowledge has taught us that these things are true.

So yes, I consider people posing such views to be pretty damn stupid and I think they need to be told just how damn stupid they are.

They are taught in schools to brainwash people into believing stuff that are not true so our leaders are able to control us easily. Evolution is one big hoax just like Global warming, 9/11 ect. Evolution theory was used to systematicly to destroy Christianity, and hide our real origins. Its like people pretend that there wasn't much more advanced civilizations before us. Nothing is true, what make something fact? I consider people stupid if they don't look at alternative views and have a believe system so that their minds can't be changed when evidence disproves their believes, or they don't question everything. They just look to one source of information. Nothing is true everything is permitted!

God please be trolling...

9/11 a hoax? Really? Care to explain where the Twin Towers are?