Limiting the Spread of Science Denialism

Science denialism is all around us. Moon landing hoaxers, climate change deniers, anti-vaxxers. How do you argue with these people? Should you even debate?

Ars Technica reports on a research paper about this subject published recently in Nature Human Behavior.

“Vaccines are safe and effective,” write researchers Philipp Schmid and Cornelia Betsch in a paper published in Nature Human Behavior this week. “Humans cause global warming. Evolution theory explains the diversity and change of life.” But large numbers of people do not believe that these statements are true, with devastating effects: progress toward addressing the climate crisis is stultifyingly slow, and the US is seeing its largest measles outbreak since 2000.

Getting accurate information across in the face of this science denialism is something of a minefield, as there is evidence that attempts to correct misinformation may backfire, further entrenching the beliefs of science deniers instead. In their paper, Schmid and Betsch present some good news and some bad: rebutting misinformation reduces the ensuing level of science denialism, but not enough to completely counter the effect of the original exposure to misinformation.

This is an important article on one of the more pressing subjects of our time. No society can survive when a substantial portion of its population denies reality.