When the formerly esteemed journal Nature endorsed one side of politics in 2020, apparently it didn’t change any votes, but about a third of Trump supporters decided the science it published was politically biased too. The loss of trust in Nature was so strong that it tarnished the whole field of US science. (Zhang et al)
There goes the public faith in peer reviewed “Experts”.
“Trump supporters who had been shown the summary of Nature’s editorial were less likely to trust Nature’s information on COVID-19, and also reported more mistrust in US scientists.”
Being actively political meant 154 years of scientific reputation disappeared just like that. In the graph below presumably* naive Trump supporters ranked Nature as mostly “informed” (marked in orange, of course). The Trump supporters who saw the political endorsement (marked in red) suddenly, apparently saw Nature as more of a partisan rag than an impartial reporter of scientific truth.
@Nature says: In 2020, Nature endorsed Joe Biden in the US presidential election. A survey finds that viewing the endorsement did not change people’s views of the candidates, but caused some to lose confidence in Nature and in US scientists generally.*
Naturally, although the data was smashingly strong, Nature completely missed the signal. The editors tell us it’s the voters fault:
This experiment builds on the literature on trust in research among people with different political allegiances. This includes the idea of confirmation bias, whereby people on different sides tend to favour evidence that supports the views they already have, while avoiding evidence that does not, and the backfire (or rebound) effect, whereby evidence that challenges a view can have the opposite effect to that intended.
So Nature took a hit for the team. The editors say they had to do it, and would do it again.
Jo Nova says, please do, your science journal is a travesty of bias and unreason, and the more voters that realize that, the better. Endorse Away! Nature also endorses namecalling in science and published “research papers” on how to convince “climate change deniers” to believe (Bain et al). I offered to help them reach thousands of deniers, if they could only define the term scientifically and name the evidence that deniers deny. They were unable to. I managed to get an apology issued then. But, true to their religion, Nature was the journal that published a blacklist of 386 scientists and commentators who got too much media on climate change and shouldn’t be listened to (Petersen et al). It was an honor for me to be be listed at 99. (With the other half, David Evans very pleased to be ranked at 57).
To mark the occasion I designed a cover page just for them for free:
… by Jo Nova, 2020.
Since 60% of US voters already think climate change is a religion, all Nature has to do is keep pumping out these kind of excuses (below) and no one will believe anything it says. It’s acting for all the world like a Union of Science Bureaucrats that think they know what’s best for the health and wellbeing of US citizens, even if the voters aren’t smart enough. Nature, being paid mostly through government funded subscriptions knows Big Government is always the answer.
Excuses from the Nature Editorial Staff:
Should Nature endorse political candidates? Yes — when the occasion demands it
Political endorsements might not always win hearts and minds, but when candidates threaten a retreat from reason, science must speak out.
…the study does question whether research journals should endorse electoral candidates if one implication is falling trust in science. This is an important question, and there are, sadly, no easy answers. The study shows the potential costs of making an endorsement. But inaction has costs, too. Considering the record of Trump’s four years in office, this journal judged that silence was not an option.
Nature’s October 2020 editorial was an appeal to readers in the United States to consider the dangers that four more years of Trump would pose — not only for science, but also for the health and well-being of US society and the wider world. Trump had laid waste to science and scientific institutions at home on issues from COVID-19 to climate change, and had gutted environmental regulations even in the face of increasing climate risk. At a time when the world needed to unite to deal with these and other global threats, he took an axe to international relationships, pulling the United States out of the 2015 Paris climate agreement and the United Nations science agency, UNESCO. He moved to defund the World Health Organization, and he walked away from a deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) that the United States had carefully negotiated with Europe, China and Russia to prevent Iran’s government from enriching weapons-grade uranium. It is hard not to think of a worst-case scenario for public health, climate change or nuclear security had Trump remained in office today.
How dare any political leader defund globalist committees that spread viruses and rave about President Xi?!
____________
* The graph Nature tweeted doesn’t say what the survey answers relate to, and the paper is behind their own paywall, but we presume this graph refers to a question about their own reputation, not how Trump supporters scored on a science-quiz.
REFERENCES
Floyd Jiuyun Zhang, Political endorsement by Nature and trust in scientific expertise during COVID-19, Nature Human Behaviour (2023). DOI: 10.1038/s41562-023-01537-5. www.nature.com/articles/s41562-023-01537-5
Alexander Michael Petersen, Emmanuel M. Vincent & Anthony LeRoy Westerling (2019) Discrepancy in scientific authority and media visibility of climate change scientists and contrarians, Nature Communications, volume 10, Article number: 3502 (2019) | Copy of the deleted supplementary list here.
Get woke Go Broke! Aw well someone hade to say it!
181
Nice one, Jo! Great to be listed amongst the good and famous!
290
Correct. The Grand Order of Novans award.
60
Politics should be kept out of Science, Religion, Sport and just about everything except for Politics. That will likely never happen of course.
230
Science , politics , sport and MSM seem to be glued together by ideology and anything that relies on ideology and faith in my books is a religion .
130
El Gato Malo has a formula that rings true
Politics + Science = Political Science.
When you allow politics to enter into the realm of scientific discovery, it is no longer science. It is politics wearing a science skin suit.
30
Having worked in science for some 19 years before i could not stand it anymore
This has been brewing for many years climate change is the obvious example
Science being used by politicians to justify there unwelcome plans is nothing new
Using funding to control scientists and science has been employed for many years
The business community has been aware for many years and has tried to manipulate the situation in ways to support there individual wants and needs
More and more of the general public are becoming skeptical of scientists and there motives
410
Not to mention COV-19 and vacces.
160
Here in NZ the science was presented by medical academics and administrators and a lesbian with pink dyed hair
But you are correct the vax and virus bs was totally out of control
131
<blockquote>your science journal is a travesty of bias and unreason</blockquote>
Au contraire Jo, it is a <b>paragon</b> of bias and unreason.
100
Looks like html formatting isn’t welcome anymore (and preview didn’t work for me). Try with the buttons:
Au contraire Jo, it is a paragon of bias and unreason.
90
How do I delete my attempt at a reply? Essential for me to be able to explore.
40
Nature was started as a propaganda magazine by supporters of Thomas Huxley, following 2 previous magazine failures. It gained support because Darwin’s idea had become more fashionable.
110
I’ll say it again…What ever happened to ‘Nullius in Verba’?
110
Graeme No.3 >”Nature was started as a propaganda magazine by supporters of Thomas Huxley”
Yes and an interesting progression from there arriving at modern politics: Eugenics – Nazi Eugenics – UNESCO,WWF – Modern US Democrats.
The Early History of the Eugenics Movementhttps://www.hli.org/resources/history-of-eugenics-movement/
Eight Startling and Uncomfortable Ways the Democrat Party Emulates the Nazi PartyBy Steve McCann
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/03/eight_startling_and_uncomfortable_ways_the_democrat_party_emulates_the_nazi_party.html
>”@Nature says: In 2020, Nature endorsed Joe Biden in the US presidential election
So they also endorse Democrat Party policy. Steve McCann on that:
“For all intents and purposes, the Democrat party could easily be renamed: The National Marxist/Socialist Party.”
80
Good article.
20
So here we have Nature mixing politics and science, where all you end up with is politics. But also Scientific American endorsed Biden in the 2020 election. In Sept 2020 SciAm (which funnily enough is actually a British journal) endorsed Joe Biden and Kamala Harris for the US presidency. In their 175 year history they had never endorsed any political candidate. They claimed the 2020 election was “literally a matter of life and death. We urge you to vote for health, science and Joe Biden for President”. But I still cant see how Donald Trump was anti-science anyway. Also similarly claimed by Nature. If anything Trump listened too closely to his main COVID scientific advisors, Fauci, Birx and Collins. It was only later when Scott Atlas was recruited that some real truths were exposed.
270
On a slight drift regarding the reliability or veracity of science, has anyone noticed how many Tropical cyclones have formed or have been named in Australian waters this season? “Gabrielle” and “Freddy” are two to mind. Not one has made landfall to date. BoM forecast a 73percent chance of increased risk from these events so it appears they were off the mark a bit. Still, there is another few weeks left.
150
To qualify, there are normally 10 to 11 each high season,
50
Probably should always ask David Karoly that question. He was the Australian meteorologist of “Natural disasters” chapter of the 2007 IPCC Climate report. That, even though hurricane (cyclone) experts (eg. Roger Pielke jr) said there was no evidence that global warming would make cyclones worse, IPCC personnel (Karoly) nevertheless predicted this to be the case. Why? Because climate models said so. Karoly is a bit of demi-god amongst the Australian climate alarmist fraternity and so I suspect the BOM will forever be claiming an increase in cyclone activity.
170
Karoly only reads research that aligns with his predetermined view.
He ignored the CSIRO research which shows a “50% decrease in Tropical Cyclones in the Australian region”:
https://research.csiro.au/climate/wp-content/uploads/sites/54/2016/03/11_WP11-CAF-climchange-tropcyclones.pdf
40
Except that’s not what the CSIRO said.
Its research concluded a 50% reduction in tropical cyclones in the Australia region:
https://research.csiro.au/climate/wp-content/uploads/sites/54/2016/03/11_WP11-CAF-climchange-tropcyclones.pdf
See para 2 of the Abstract Page 1.
10
Apologies for the double post.
The first one didn’t appear so I tried again and ended up with two for one. 🙂
20
Freddy has had the alarmists making all sorts of record claims, longest lived, most repeated intensifications, more ACE than an entire N.Atlantic hurricane season……
https://youtu.be/jKcz5tb_-DU
40
New layout is attractive if a little spread out. Darker text would make it easier (for old eyes) to read.
80
I’m just doing this as a test. I have no preview button on this and my avatar seems to have changed. The “join the discussion” at the top of the comments has a Preview facility. Am I being thick? ToM
20
Sorry, forget the bit about the avatar, when I posted my old one came back, but still no preview button. Help!! ToM
20
only basic tool bar same as old version browser is firefox
10
Hi Jo, Just wondering if anyone else is finding the grey text used for comments in this new format a little but harder to read? The black text in the article is nice and clear.
180
It can be changed if you are logged on via WP but I agree that black would be a better default.
90
Yes, my old eyes would appreciate darker text also.
I’ve also noticed that when I click on the Thumbs-up button, the number does not increase, but if I refresh the screen, I see the updated number. This seems to be true on both My Edge browser and My Dissenter browser.
I don’t see a preview button on my reply.
Also, my Icon is different when I compose my message, but the correct one appears when I post the message.
Finally, I like the “Gear Icon” at the bottom which allows me to correct errors in my post and repost it and the “Preview” button appears on the correction screen but doesn’t appear to work.
80
I have also just noticed that your reply to my comment is in a smaller font size. That’s a double whammy on my eyes.
40
Yes, good point; I hadn’t noticed that until you pointed it out.
10
I agree with all that. There must be a way to clean up the layout, use dark fonts and get numbering and dates back.
70
I agree. I find the light grey text a bit hard, but it can be changed. Certainly the editing buttons are easier to use than in the previous version. I have no preview button on this comment. Is there one?
20
I don’t see buttons, only the one for adding a photo/chart and a crossed-out bell thing. Am on an old android tablet using DDG.
20
Nature can join Scientific American which also used to be a reputable general coverage journal which got dumbed-down starting in 1986 with a change of ownership to Holtzbrinck. In 2008 it was put under control of the Nature Publishing Group division of Holtzbrinck to fully complete its dumbing-down and politicisation.
Nature and SciAm are now in the same stable!
Get woke, go broke!
140
It has been several decades since Scientific American was either scientific or American 🙂
30
True science is noble and pure. Politics is not. When politics intrudes, science becomes tainted.
120
Trump did not start any wars. He brokered Israeli peace deals in 4 Arab countries.
150
Or was that 3 Arab and One African Country. All off his own bat. Peace does not enrich the military-industrialists though.
90
The editor of The Lancet is an Extinction Rebellion supporter.
Which I suspect goes a long way to explain how a lot of people now regard that formerly prestigious journal as a load of activist rubbish.
David Burge@iowahawkblog
1. Target a respected institution
2. Kill & clean it
3. Wear it as a skin suit, while demanding respect
11:46 PM · May 25, 2016
200
Excellent magazine cover!
Well done!
150
Many scientists are the first to blink,
Who fear being labelled wrong-think,
As scores are black-listed,
For having resisted,
The politically correct nod and a wink.
200
I remind you of President Eisenhower’s farewell address (excerpt), Jan 17, 1961:
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
…
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocation, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet in holding scientific discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
110
Kvon, the world’s greatest Irani comedian, did a few run-throughs, pre election, of Biden v Trump’s records. This is on covid. 31 mins of Trump saying what he said, v the MSM telling us what he said.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdqvJITqkuc&list=PL2A_5tzLJLJcMbY90nBS03u0zF7Yyv3tL&index=7
50
The takeover of Nature by Leftist political activists to make it woke and dumb is just another part of the 1967 plan of German communist Rudi Dutschke’s “long march through the institutions”
80
Jo, I don’t know if anything can be done about it, but I do most of my posts from an Android phone and the formatting toolbar is not present. It would be really useful if it were so.
20
Political endorsements might not always win hearts and minds, but when candidates threaten a retreat from reason, science must speak out.
Science doesn’t speak about politics. Ever.
40
”Helsinki university promotes honorary doctorates – among them climate activist Greta Thunberg”
Helsinki University, Finland, has announced new honorary doctorates. Among them is Greta Thunberg, who is appointed by the Faculty of Theology. She has received earlier a similar doctorate from the University at Mons, Belgium.
https://www.foxnews.com/world/greta-thunberg-receive-honorary-doctorate-finnish-university
and
https://netherlands.postsen.com/trends/156333/Greta-receives-an-honorary-doctorate-in-THEOLOGY-from-the-University-of-Helsinki.html
Good and revealing it was the faculty of theology and not any of the faculties of natural sciences. Now it is clearly announced (twice) that climate change is a religion, not science. Amen!
30
I was born with crap imposed onto me and had to educate myself out of its dark clutches…
20
Congratulations and thanks for your industry in the face of the rabid true believers Jo.
Typical of the Australian tall poppy syndrome, the troglodytes don’t recognise the eminence of those within our own community. They are like children, trusting in the old corrupted associations holding well recognised titles like UN, EU, WEF, WWS etc, or so trusting of any messages coated in emotional sugar but not recognising the poison hidden within.
The poison of propaganda is so obvious now. The youth of the day are so terrified of something they won’t be alive to experience a century from now which may or may not happen if the planet warms a further 2 or 3C (or should that be ‘K’ these days) of its own accord.
What they are not seeing is the armageddon they may be facing as early as next year if Australia persists in overwhelmingly chasing renewables and destroying functioning fossil fuel based generation. People still believe inflation is from the EU losing its gas supplies from Russia. Even the threat of a further 20-30% up in price of power hasn’t broken the shackles and see the government is the source of much of their future problems.
Again, thank you for your strong endeavours while facing a background of personal and scientific abuse and a blockade on your input to what is a now pseudo scientific debate. The science is based on the personal opinions of some of your peers. They tolerate no debate on those opinions. Isn’t this directly the same intolerant methodology of the marxists? It is certainly an abuse of Democracy and this climate debacle may well be the loss of Democracy.
50
Another useless publication is the Non Scientist, sorry, New Scientist.
For years I was a subscriber then stopped as things got worse with Climate change regularly receiving utterly biased and almost always wrong coverage. Then covid appeared and its shameful bias about vaxxes and utterly wrong stance on even basic details was overwhelming, so I ceased even looking at it in the library.
I mean, how do you know with such a publication if anything it publishes is correct with such obvious falsehoods being pushed??
A shame as years ago it was a worthwhile read. I hope “go woke, go broke” happens here.
20
Michael Crichton said back in 2003 when he gave a lecture at the California Institute of Technology.
“Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”
Nature is about consensus.[1] I’m sure others can provide other links.
Therefore Nature is not about science.
Regards
Climate Heretic
[1] <a href=”https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate1875″> Climate consensus</a>
41
Richard P. Feynman
30
I’m unable to upvote and of course HTML link not working.
Regards
Climate Heretic
20
Personal Test in editing… re Climate Heretic’s post.
For information.
Running laptop, win 10, windows edge.
Climate Heretic’s link in the post submitted above: https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate1875
Lets see if that works. I copied the text, pasted it in my reply. Selected it and pressed the link button. and then pressed save.
I have no idea if this will work.
An aside:
C H, at the moment you will see the upvote if you refresh the webpage.
Jo is working to iron out gremlins.
See link here:
https://joannenova.com.au/2023/03/wednesday-open-thread-33/#comment-2646239
10
Meanwhile, here in USA, Dr. Fauci has destroyed the cred of top government doctors. Utterly destroyed. He didn’t have to endorse Biden to destroy it, he simply said “I’m the science” while hiding the flow of money. Our news is showing clips from a worshipful NPR documentary showing the good doctor walking DC lying to people (he told one mother to get the shot to prevent her kids catching it from her- I’ll call it the BIG LIE). When the CCP spills out the next bug, I won’t believe a word from our federal gov’t doctors, possibly to my own harm. Fauci is the worst sort because in his own mind, he believes his own BS.
60
Believe me, they won’t get it.
Too much immersed in their alternative universe.
20
I am honored and gratified to be on the list!
20
.
20
I dislike annoying popup bubbles that start nagging me to participate before I have read enough data to form an opinion. This should not be a major suprise, in hindsight.
It has in this instance caused participation. I’m glad I was not asked “how” I think 😉
10
Delusions of Adequacy.
An “True expert” from Academia is now one with zero real world experience and all the “Proper” beliefs.
The self styled “Journal of Science” became the
Keepers of The Science..
Seems it is easiest to be expert in fields you have never plowed.
I know how easily things can go sideways.
How each day will teach something new.
With well over 40 years on the tools,I make no claim to be expert in my chosen trade..
But I remain amazed by the audacity of the ignorant.
Having watched someone else perform, the ignorant assume that the task is easy,if the skilled person performing it,makes it look so.
Science,as defined and explained by Mr Richard Feynman, is a world of uncertainty,the ability to fool oneself leading the charge to confusion..
“The Science” is something else..the belief in the authority of experts?
Where certainty is worshipped..
“Thou shalt be silenced for questioning”
Is “Natures ,the magazine”s watchword.
About as far from the Scientific Method as one can get..
As noted above,this level of hubris does not cross into politics well at all.
“Vote for X” or you are “Scientifically ignorant”
All good scientist support X..
Just another advertisement.
And tells the adversarial reader, that the Magazine believes you are too stupid to weigh the evidence and draw your own conclusions..Leading their readers to conclude…
Whatever Nature is selling,
It ain’t science.
So why waste my money?
And it shows..
Just as the Print and Television Media’s have collapsed into being beggars at the foot of our bureaus..
Because the public is not willing to buy what they are selling..
Turns out the individual,spending their own money,are not as stupid as so many “experts” assume.
10