A good question

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. Rayedish says:

    Because good science doesn’t sell. Its not sexy and it takes a lot of space to explain the ideas, the theories and their development. Bad science OTOH is easy to sell, and the less that has to be explained the better. That’s why newpapers carry “scientific stories” like ‘Women have more orgasms with rich guys’ and not stories about climate change.

    • lividlili says:

      Have you ever read Ben Goldacre’s “Bad Science”? He is always banging on about the way in which nonsense science stories get privileged over real science. http://www.badscience.net/ – A great read. I also recommend the book of the same name.

  2. Lulu says:

    Because your chauffer has a point – mainstream media are aptly “scare mongers” who mainly report stories drenched in fear, doom and gloom.
    If you ever see her taxi again, you ought to plant one of those bumper stickers on her vehicle: “Is that the truth, or did you read it in the Daily Telegraph”

  3. Lulu says:

    That said, I always like to keep a balanced perspective on things.
    I haven’t read alot of science books, as I am more interested in politics, law, crime and religion for light reading 😉
    But when I google it, I see alot of movement coming from both sides. As a natural queerier (excuse the pun) I am interested to read more.
    http://climatechangeskeptic.blogspot.com/

    • Hypernation says:

      Seems strange that you think the bias towards fear over fact in print media somehow doesn’t apply online. Remember, anyone can write on the internet. Even me.

      And people love having a strong opinion either way, even if they know nothing of any worth.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: