Open Forum: Liberating Science

Arguments

We need to engage more with social media to spread accurate scientific information

Supporting facts:

• Disinformation spreads rapidly on social media platforms like TikTok

Concern about prevalent fake news and its effects on public health, specifically, vaccination

Supporting facts:

• Example of Osama Bin Laden’s assassination where individuals involved in vaccination were used, leading to increased mistrust and avoidance of vaccines in areas like Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Highlighting the role of media and government spreading misinformation

Supporting facts:

• Radical entities shutting down media outlets in Yemen

• Effective propaganda by radical groups that control people’s mindset

Challenge of spreading awareness and correct information to immigrants and refugees

Questioning who to trust regarding misinformation

Supporting facts:

• The questioner refers to different stakeholders such as media, politicians, companies, research organizations, universities

Science work should be evidence-based and verified

Supporting facts:

• Internal fracture fixation was introduced based on evidence

• Lab 42 in Davos is working on a verified form of CHAT-GBT

Comparison between Galileo and organized religions to multi-corporations

Supporting facts:

• The questioner is an architect, former educator, and inventor of post-quantum cybersecurity.

Report

The analysis covers a range of topics related to information and media, delving into the spread of disinformation on social media platforms like TikTok, the need for scientists to actively engage with social media to disseminate accurate information, and the detrimental effects of fake news on public health and vaccination rates.

It also explores the role of government and media in spreading misinformation, the challenges of spreading correct information to immigrants and refugees, and the question of who to trust in the face of misinformation. Furthermore, it highlights the importance of evidence-based and verified scientific work, while also uncovering the potential damage caused by irresponsible scientific practices.

Lastly, it draws a parallel between historical constructs of power and modern corporations, using the figure of Galileo as a symbol. One of the key points highlighted in the analysis is the rapid spread of disinformation on social media platforms such as TikTok, which raises concerns about the accuracy of information available to the public and its potential negative impact on individuals’ health and well-being.

The argument put forth is that there is a need for greater engagement with social media to ensure the dissemination of accurate scientific information. Another important aspect explored is the role of scientists in actively engaging with social media to spread accurate information.

The analysis reveals that scientists have not widely engaged with social media for scientific discourse, indicating a need for them to be more proactive in this regard. By embracing social media platforms, scientists can effectively communicate their research findings and counter the spread of misinformation.

The analysis also highlights the prevalence of fake news and its detrimental effects on public health, particularly in relation to vaccination. An example provided is the case of Osama Bin Laden’s assassination, where individuals involved in vaccination were used, leading to increased mistrust and avoidance of vaccines in regions like Pakistan and Afghanistan.

This emphasizes the crucial need for accurate information dissemination to combat the spread of fake news and its negative consequences. Additionally, the analysis discusses the role of government and media in spreading misinformation, citing examples such as radical entities shutting down media outlets in Yemen and the effective propaganda employed by radical groups to control people’s mindset.

This draws attention to the importance of holding these entities accountable and promoting responsible and unbiased reporting to ensure the public receives accurate information. Furthermore, the analysis raises concerns about spreading correct information to immigrants and refugees, who may face barriers in accessing reliable sources.

Recognizing the challenge, efforts should be made to bridge these information gaps and ensure accurate information reaches these communities, particularly in relation to health awareness. The analysis also questions who to trust amidst the abundance of misinformation. It acknowledges the involvement of various stakeholders such as media, politicians, companies, research organizations, and universities.

This underlines the need for individuals to discern reliable sources and seek trustworthy information. Importantly, the analysis emphasizes the significance of evidence-based and verified scientific work. By conducting research based on rigorous methods and adhering to scientific standards, the credibility and trustworthiness of scientific findings are preserved.

This ensures that the information disseminated to the public is dependable and can contribute to informed decision-making. However, the analysis also acknowledges that science can be damaged if not done responsibly. It highlights the case of Macerichini, a tissue engineer who performed unnecessary procedures with trachea without following rigorous steps.

This was enabled by the support of deans and others at Karolinska, leading to further damage. Such instances demonstrate the potential harm caused by irresponsible scientific practices and the importance of upholding scientific integrity. Lastly, the analysis draws a parallel between historical constructs of power, such as organized religions, and modern corporations.

It uses Galileo as a symbol to explore the comparison, acknowledging the questioner’s background as an architect and their observation that both old and new power systems have far-reaching effects. This connection raises thought-provoking questions about the influence and impact of modern corporations in society.

In conclusion, the analysis covers a wide range of topics related to information and media, highlighting prevalent issues such as the spread of disinformation on social media, the need for scientists to actively engage with social platforms, the detrimental effects of fake news on public health, and the role of government and media in spreading misinformation.

It also explores challenges in spreading accurate information to immigrants and refugees, the question of who to trust amidst misinformation, the importance of evidence-based scientific work, and the potential damage caused by irresponsible scientific practices. Additionally, it draws attention to parallels between historical constructs of power and modern corporations, providing valuable insights into the complex dynamics of information dissemination in today’s world.

Arguments

Misinformation and disinformation about climate change is currently a big problem

Supporting facts:

• 2023 was the warmest year in 125,000 years

• There are record-breaking climate extremes

Carlos Alfonso Nobre advocates for climate scientists to play responsible advocacy

Supporting facts:

• Many more climate scientists now than 20, 30 years ago are becoming responsible advocates

Scientists must become more effective in responsible advocacy

Supporting facts:

• Brazil was among the three countries with the highest vaccination rate, which later changed with the president being against science and vaccination.

Erosion of trust in science is continuous in Brazil

Supporting facts:

• Brazil had the third highest mortality for the COVID pandemic

• More than 1 million people died

• Only 70% of the people took vaccination

• 75% of greenhouse gas emissions in Brazil is from agriculture and deforestation

Climate science is the science with the least number of deniers

Supporting facts:

• More than 99% of scientific articles are not from deniers

There is still an erosion of trust in science, including climate science

Populism is increasing in the world in the last 20 years

Supporting facts:

• Many countries like U.S., Brazil, and many other countries are electing populist, mostly far extreme right-wing, but also left-wing extremists

Climate advocacy is exhausting but necessary work

Supporting facts:

• Carlos Alfonso Nobre spends 50% of his time not doing science, but advocating for climate

We are on the brink of a sixth extinction due to climate change

Supporting facts:

• If we reach four degrees warming by 2100, this is sixth extinction.

• 1.5 degrees will cause the extinction of 90% of coral reef species

• Two degrees will result in the disappearance of all coral species

Report

Misinformation and disinformation surrounding climate change are prevalent issues that contribute to people’s disbelief in its existence and risks. However, there is clear scientific evidence highlighting the reality and potential hazards of climate change. The occurrence of record-breaking climate extremes and the warmest year in 125,000 years in 2023 are supporting facts that reinforce this argument.

In response to the climate crisis, there is an increasing number of climate scientists taking on the role of responsible advocates. Unlike in the past, more climate scientists are actively working to raise awareness and educate the public about the urgent need for climate action.

Carlos Alfonso Nobre, for example, dedicates 50% of his time to advocating for climate change. This shift towards climate advocacy plays a crucial role in combating misinformation and ensuring accurate information reaches a wider audience. While climate scientists are striving to become more effective advocates, there is also a pressing need for greater awareness and understanding of the importance of science in policymaking.

It is disheartening to witness leaders who dismiss the significance of scientific research when formulating policies. The president of Brazil’s disregard for the importance of vaccination, despite the country historically having high vaccination rates, exemplifies this issue. Such behavior erodes trust in science and hampers the ability to make informed decisions.

Brazil faces additional challenges in terms of climate change denial within its agribusiness sector. Despite the fact that agriculture and deforestation contribute to 75% of greenhouse gas emissions in Brazil, the agribusiness remains resistant to change. Even as climate extremes, such as drought, significantly impact agriculture, the denial of climate change within the agribusiness sector persists.

This poses a significant obstacle to effectively addressing the climate crisis. The rise of populism globally, with countries such as the U.S. and Brazil electing populist leaders, further compounds the challenges faced in combating climate change. Populist leaders, typically from extreme right-wing or left-wing backgrounds, tend to exhibit tendencies that undermine scientific findings.

This negative sentiment towards science undermines efforts to address the climate crisis and fosters an environment where misinformation thrives. While climate advocacy is seen as necessary, it is also an exhausting undertaking that requires dedicated effort and perseverance. Nevertheless, the urgency of the climate crisis mandates that individuals and organizations continue to advocate for meaningful action.

The consequences of climate change extend beyond environmental concerns, with biodiversity emerging as a significant issue. The potential for a sixth extinction looms closer as the planet approaches a four-degree warming by 2100. Such a scenario would have devastating effects, including the extinction of 90% of coral reef species at a warming of 1.5 degrees and the disappearance of all coral species at two degrees of warming.

This emphasizes the dire need to promptly and effectively address climate change to prevent further loss of biodiversity. In conclusion, climate change misinformation and disinformation hinder efforts to tackle the climate crisis by promoting disbelief and apathy. Climate scientists are adapting their roles to become responsible advocates, raising awareness and educating the public.

However, the erosion of trust in science, particularly among leaders and within specific industries like agribusiness, poses significant hurdles. The rise of populism and its anti-science sentiment exacerbate the challenges faced in addressing climate change. Climate advocacy is an essential but exhausting endeavor as the risks posed by climate change, including the potential for a sixth extinction, weigh heavily.

It is crucial to present the risks associated with climate change and advocate responsibly to encourage effective action.

Arguments

We are living in a difficult environment with information and disinformation, facts against twisted facts

Supporting facts:

• The news is spreading instantly and momentarily

Rebuilding trust requires transparency, accountability, and public accessibility

Supporting facts:

• Her work as an auditor in Luxembourg involved checking the implementation of European policies

• Ivanova notes the importance of understandable and accessible communication to the public

Reaching a consensus within the European Union is a complex process, but possible with effort and compromise

Supporting facts:

• The process requires a lot of effort, compromise, and discussion

• The process takes time and energy

Education and understanding of good and bad should start with personal responsibility and from the family.

Supporting facts:

• Mentioned the need for each individual to take responsibility for educating others, starting from a family

Being open in sharing information makes the field of research vulnerable to risks such as wars, foreign interferences, and misuse of sensitive data for military or other harmful purposes.

Supporting facts:

• Noted the shared concerns from member states and academic institutions regarding research security

Trust to yourselves, to your common sense, to your own judgment

Education is vital to build a young generation that is literate

Supporting facts:

• Starting from a very early age to educate

• Make an educated choice

Report

The analysis covers a wide range of topics related to information, communication, and trust in today’s society. One key point is the importance of distinguishing between facts and misinformation in the fast-spreading news environment. The speakers remark on the difficulty of navigating an environment where information and disinformation coexist, with facts often being twisted or manipulated.

This highlights the need for individuals to critically evaluate the sources and validity of the information they encounter. Another main point discussed is the promotion of open science, open access, and open data. The speakers advocate for the creation of a European research area where research and knowledge can freely circulate.

They stress the significance of building a transparent and accessible scientific community that facilitates collaboration and the sharing of knowledge. The European Commission’s commitment to promoting open science and allocating funding to support it is highlighted as a positive step towards this goal.

Trust is identified as a crucial component that underpins effective communication and the functioning of institutions. Rebuilding trust is seen as a critical requirement in achieving transparent and accountable governance. The speakers emphasize the importance of transparency, accountability, and public accessibility in rebuilding trust.

They discuss the significance of understandable and accessible communication to the public, particularly in the context of European policies and initiatives. The speakers also delve into the importance of communicating science in a simple and accessible manner. They argue that science should be presented in a way that the public can easily understand and appreciate.

This would contribute to improving science literacy and public engagement with scientific advancements, ultimately leading to informed decision-making. Additionally, democratic debate is highlighted as essential for a functioning society, even if some viewpoints may not initially seem logical. The speakers mention observed trends in elections in member states, underscoring the need to consider and respect all viewpoints in order to maintain a peaceful and inclusive society.

The complexity of reaching consensus within the European Union is another topic of discussion. While the process requires significant effort, compromise, and discussion, the speakers assert that consensus can be achieved through unity in diversity. They argue that embracing diversity strengthens the European Union and enhances its competitiveness on the global stage.

Education emerges as a key theme throughout the analysis. The speakers stress the responsibility of each individual, starting from the family, to educate themselves and others about important issues. Education is seen as the foundation for fostering a society that can distinguish between good and bad and make informed choices.

Regarding the role of politicians, they are urged to create appropriate regulatory frameworks that hold social media accountable for their actions. This is seen as a necessary step in ensuring responsible and ethical use of social media platforms. In conclusion, the analysis highlights the need to navigate the complex information landscape by critically evaluating facts and misinformation.

It stresses the importance of open science, transparent communication, trust-building, accessible science communication, democratic debate, unity in diversity, and the role of education and personal responsibility. The speakers advocate for political action to ensure the responsible use of social media platforms.

Overall, the analysis provides valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities presented by information, communication, and trust in today’s society.

Arguments

Disinformation can drive wrong decisions from personal to government level

Supporting facts:

• The new WEF Global Risks Report identified misinformation and disinformation as the biggest short-term risk

Many students doubt about science and struggle with data and scientific process

Supporting facts:

• Luciana Vaccaro’s experience as a teacher in higher education

People need to be educated about the scientific process

Supporting facts:

• Concerns about the public’s understanding of scientific consensus during the Corona period

• Disagreements and being wrong are a part of the scientific process

Misunderstandings about the scientific process can lead to conclusions about incompetence

Supporting facts:

• People may form opinions of incompetence due to disagreements or changes in scientific opinion, such as with the use of masks during the Corona period

Scientists are human and can make mistakes

Supporting facts:

• Luciana Vaccaro agrees that scientists can sometimes be biased or too political

Transparency in decision-making processes in science is important

Supporting facts:

• After COVID, the Bundeskanzler of Switzerland institutionalized a more transparently nominated scientific task force

Scientists need to better explain their findings to the public

Supporting facts:

• Vaccaro believes that the ability to express complex ideas in a simple manner demonstrates true understanding

Switzerland scientists are anxious about new negotiations with Horizon Europe

Supporting facts:

• Negotiations with Horizon Europe will begin in the next months

• Scientists in Switzerland have been vocal about their stance

Participation in Horizon Europe is crucial for Switzerland

Supporting facts:

• Horizon Europe hosts the most prestigious grants a scientist can have

• Participation in Horizon Europe would also involve Switzerland in discussions about the policy of science

The pandemic has taught us that research organizations and politics need to work better together

Supporting facts:

• The advice given by politics is often based on scientific data which might not always be well structured

Social media platforms, due to their large influence, need a code of conduct to prevent spreading of harmful and false information

Supporting facts:

• Luciana Vaccaro has abandoned Twitter due to its toxic environment

Report

The analysis explores several key concerns and arguments raised by the speakers. Firstly, there is a growing worry about the prevalence of misinformation and doubts about science among students. Many students struggle with understanding data and the scientific process. Luciana Vaccaro, an experienced teacher in higher education, has observed that her students often have doubts about science.

This highlights the need to address the lack of knowledge and understanding in this area, as it can lead to incorrect decisions being made. Furthermore, the speakers emphasise the importance of educating people about the scientific process. They argue that misunderstandings about science can result in conclusions about incompetence.

The scientific process is not always well understood by the public, particularly during times of crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. It is essential for people to be aware that disagreements and being proven wrong are natural aspects of scientific progress.

This understanding would help combat the formation of negative opinions and conclusions based on misconceptions. The analysis also highlights the fact that scientists are human and can make mistakes. While scientists strive to be neutral and objective, they are not infallible.

Acknowledging this human element is important in fostering trust in the scientific community and understanding that scientific findings and theories are subject to revision and refinement. Transparency in decision-making processes within the scientific community is recognized as crucial. The example of the Bundeskanzler of Switzerland institutionalizing a more transparently nominated scientific task force following the COVID-19 pandemic is discussed.

Transparency is seen as necessary for building trust and ensuring the integrity of scientific endeavours. The communication of scientific findings to the public is another key aspect highlighted by the speakers. Luciana Vaccaro advocates for better explanation of complex ideas in a simple manner.

This would bridge the gap between scientists and the general public and promote a greater understanding of scientific concepts. Moving beyond education and communication, the analysis also touches on the concerns of Swiss scientists regarding negotiations with Horizon Europe, a research and innovation framework program.

The participation of Switzerland in this program is considered crucial, as it would provide access to prestigious grants and involve participation in discussions about the policy of science. The anxiety among scientists regarding the new negotiations reflects the importance attributed to international collaboration and the belief that science should have no borders.

The COVID-19 pandemic has further reinforced the need for better collaboration between research organizations and politics. The analysis notes that the advice given by politicians often relies on scientific data, which may not always be well-structured. Closer collaboration would help ensure that policies are informed by robust research and align with scientific consensus.

Lastly, the analysis highlights the impact of social media platforms and the need for a code of conduct to prevent the spread of harmful and false information. Luciana Vaccaro’s decision to abandon Twitter due to its toxic environment underscores the potential negative consequences of unchecked misinformation on these platforms.

The speakers advocate for a code of conduct to regulate social media and mitigate the dissemination of misleading information. In conclusion, the analysis explores a range of concerns and arguments related to misinformation, doubts about science, education, transparency, communication, international collaboration, the relationship between research organizations and politics, and social media.

By addressing these issues, it is believed that we can foster a more informed and scientifically literate society.

Arguments

Science does not have a credibility problem

Supporting facts:

• A research was conducted with people in 70 different countries

• The results showed that the majority of people still trust science

People have constantly felt overwhelmed by the rapid growth of technology and information.

Supporting facts:

• Complaints about technology and information overload date back to the Industrial Revolution

Disinformation originates from certain sources, for instance vested industries.

Supporting facts:

• Organized disinformation campaigns often come from industries with vested interests, such as the fossil fuel industry

Environmental issues are closely linked with myths and disinformation.

Supporting facts:

• Among the top 10 risks reported this year, myths and disinformation rank first, followed by five environmental issues

There has been a deliberate attempt to discrediting scientific work and experts

Supporting facts:

• Proven deliberate organization and planning documents are present, detailing how to challenge scientific work and discredit experts.

• Public was inflamed against experts during the COVID-19 pandemic

Science is a process through which we discover truths about the natural world, and disagreement among science is part of that process

Agriculture, especially animal agriculture, is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and hence, climate change

Eating less red meat is good both for the planet and for the human body

Supporting facts:

• The agriculture industry spreading misinformation about the health benefits of a plant-based diet

Misinformation is rampant and is being amplified from the highest levels of power.

Supporting facts:

• President Trump made over 30,000 false or misleading claims in four years.

• Ordinary people are reposting and spreading disinformation on social media.

Private sector is sitting on the sidelines when it comes to combating disinformation.

Supporting facts:

• Much of the disinformation in social media comes from private sector interests.

• Rest of the private sector is not saying anything.

Naomi Oreskes does not believe scientists or science is to blame for societal issues

Supporting facts:

• She points out the hard work scientists have been doing during the pandemic and against opposition in the realm of climate science

The rise in populism is related to people feeling disempowered and afraid

Supporting facts:

• When change happens too quickly, it causes destabilization and fear, attracting people to a charismatic leader who promises immediate solutions

Change happening too quickly can be destabilizing and disorientating

Supporting facts:

• When people are made to feel fearful, they can be more easily swayed by leaders promising instant solutions

Science plays a role in contributing to public’s disorientation

Some Scientists deliberately mystify their work

Scientists need to communicate their findings more effectively to the public

Supporting facts:

• The need to explain not only the facts but also the evidence and process

The lack of effective communication on climate change creates confusion

It’s essential to discuss the divisive issues, especially with trustworthy relationships.

Supporting facts:

• Social scientific studies show the most effective messenger is someone you know and trust.

• Personal messengers, for most people, are more persuasive than even the most famous scientist.

In discussing such issues, it’s necessary to establish personal trust and illustrate personal acceptance of the science.

Supporting facts:

• To make the connection between the heart and the head, because as anyone in communication knows, that’s when it works.

• It’s necessary to explain why you accept the science

Calling out disinformation is significantly useful in such discussions.

Supporting facts:

• John Cook’s work on inoculation.

• If you can show people, this is a con, and you’re the victim, that shifts the conversation in powerful ways.

Engaging in social media discussions can be challenging and is often not worthwhile

Supporting facts:

• Twitter has become a toxic place

• Many denial and hostility on social media is attention-seeking

Comparing modern science deniers with Galileo is not correct

Supporting facts:

• Science today is vastly different from Galileo’s time

• Galileo was oppressed by the Catholic Church, not by other scientists

Report

According to research conducted in 70 different countries, the majority of people still trust science, indicating that science does not have a credibility problem. However, there are concerns about the spread of disinformation, particularly from industries with vested interests, such as the fossil fuel industry.

These organized disinformation campaigns aim to discredit scientific work and experts. The research also reveals a close link between environmental issues and myths/disinformation. Myths and disinformation rank first among the top 10 risks reported this year, followed by five environmental issues.

This highlights the harmful impact of misinformation on crucial environmental discussions. A notable finding is the power imbalance between industries involved in disinformation campaigns and scientific communities. Industries tend to be more organized and better funded, disadvantaging scientists in countering disinformation.

Trust in expertise has been eroded through deliberate attempts to discredit scientific work and experts, evident through proven deliberate organization and planning documents. The public’s trust in experts has further eroded during the COVID-19 pandemic. The rise in populism is linked to feelings of disempowerment and fear.

Rapid change can cause destabilization and fear, which attracts people to charismatic leaders promising immediate solutions. To address these challenges, it is argued that scientists should improve their communication skills and effectively explain their findings to the public. Establishing personal trust and demonstrating acceptance of the science are important in discussing divisive issues.

Calling out disinformation is a powerful tool in countering misleading narratives. However, engaging in discussions on social media can be challenging and often not worthwhile, as platforms like Twitter have become toxic spaces that facilitate denial and hostility. Therefore, it is suggested that scientists focus more on producing substantial works, such as writing books, instead of relying heavily on social media interactions.

A noteworthy insight from the analysis is the difference between modern science deniers and historical figures like Galileo. Galileo faced oppression from the Catholic Church, while modern climate deniers resemble oppressive entities suppressing climate science. In conclusion, although science is still largely trusted, there are concerns regarding the spread of disinformation and the erosion of trust in expertise.

Scientists can address these challenges by improving communication, establishing trust relationships, and combating disinformation. It is crucial to understand the distinctions between historical figures like Galileo and modern science deniers.

Arguments

Mistrust towards experts comes from the current multi-crisis era

Supporting facts:

• The word ‘Krisenmodus’ (Crisis mode) got voted for the word of the year 2023 in Germany

The pace of solid, researched information can’t keep up with the speed of misinformation

Supporting facts:

• Both journalism and scientific professions depend on solid research, which takes time, whereas misinformation can be spread rapidly without proper research.

Discussions are held in bubbles, with people who always agree

Supporting facts:

• Mentioned about the discussions being taking place in tight circles or bubbles where people tend to agree with each other.

Research appears elite due to its complicated nature

Supporting facts:

• Research process is often complicated and not easily understandable by most people, making it appear elite.

Being critical and questioning the content we see is a way to detect fake news

Supporting facts:

• A lot of content shared on social media is fabricated.

• Question the source of the information given.

• Look for errors or inconsistencies in the content.

Report

The analysis provides a comprehensive overview of the current information landscape, shedding light on significant aspects. Firstly, it highlights the impact of the global multi-crisis era, which has led to growing mistrust towards experts. In a period marked by crises such as Brexit, the pandemic, climate change, inflation, energy price fluctuations, and conflicts in the Middle East, the public’s faith in authority figures and their expertise has eroded.

This negative sentiment towards experts can be attributed to the numerous challenges faced by societies worldwide and the complex nature of these crises. Another crucial finding is the imbalance between the speed at which misinformation spreads compared to that of reliable, well-researched information.

The analysis notes that journalism and scientific professions heavily rely on solid research, which is a time-consuming process. On the other hand, misinformation can be quickly disseminated without adequate research or verification. This disparity in speed poses a significant challenge to the dissemination of accurate information.

Moreover, the analysis emphasizes the essential role of solid research in journalism and science. Both disciplines depend on thorough research to provide reliable and credible information. However, the availability of solid, well-researched information often lags behind the rapid spread of misinformation.

This observation highlights the pressing need to address the pace at which reliable information is produced, disseminated, and accessed to counter the prevalence of misinformation. Another noteworthy aspect discussed is the prevalence of discussions held within closed circles or bubbles, where individuals tend to surround themselves with like-minded people who share their perspectives.

This phenomenon limits the diversity of viewpoints and creates an echo chamber effect, hindering open dialogue and the exchange of ideas. This finding raises concerns about the quality of debates in society and the potential negative impact on decision-making processes.

Transparency in processes is also identified as a crucial factor in fostering trust and confidence in information. The analysis asserts that transparency helps in understanding the basis on which research findings are formed, allowing individuals to assess the accuracy and reliability of the information.

When the process is transparent, it becomes easier to identify potential errors or biases, ultimately enhancing the credibility of the information presented. Furthermore, the analysis highlights the perception of research as an elitist endeavor due to its inherently complex nature.

The intricate processes involved in academic research often make it challenging for the average person to comprehend. This perception of research as elite creates a barrier to wider public understanding and engagement with scientific and academic knowledge. The analysis also raises the issue of making proficiency more transparent.

It questions how proficiency can be made accessible and understandable to the general public, considering that complicated processes may not be easily grasped by everyone. Enhancing transparency in proficiency can contribute to improved understanding and engagement with complex topics and processes.

The importance of critical thinking and being cautious of fake news is another crucial aspect discussed in the analysis. In an era where a significant amount of content is shared on social media, it is essential to question the source of information and look for inconsistencies or errors in the content.

Being critical and skeptical allows individuals to identify and detect fake news, contributing to a more informed and discerning society. Lastly, the analysis warns against the dangers of over-simplified explanations of complex topics such as the climate crisis. Attempting to condense intricate concepts into overly simplified statements can lead to misinformation, perpetuating misunderstandings and hindering effective solutions.

This observation highlights the need for nuanced and accurate communication when discussing complex issues. Overall, the detailed analysis provides insights into various challenges and dynamics within the current information landscape. From the erosion of trust in experts to the rapid spread of misinformation, the analysis offers valuable reflections on the importance of solid research, transparency, critical thinking, and responsible communication.

It calls for a multifaceted approach to address these issues and emphasizes the need for robust and reliable information in shaping public discourse and decision-making processes.

Arguments

Most people in different countries trust science

Supporting facts:

• Research led by Victoria Colonia

• Study conducted in 70 different countries

• 98 to 99% people trust science

Observes a growing mistrust towards experts in recent years

Supporting facts:

• The trend started with Brexit, the pandemic and ongoing climate change issues

Concern over discussions being held in bubbles, in very tight circles

Supporting facts:

• Discussions are sometimes held where people always agree with one another

Politicians playing loose with facts and truth can be part of the problem

Supporting facts:

• President Trump made over 30,000 false or misleading claims in his four years as a president

Luciana Vaccaro emphasizes on transparency and explanation of scientific decisions

Supporting facts:

• In Switzerland, there was a decision from the Bundeskanzler to institutionalize a scientific task force that is more transparently nominated post-COVID.

• Vaccaro agrees with the commissioner’s idea of prioritizing transparency.

• She believes scientists should not only explain their opinions amongst themselves but to the general public as well.

Urs Gredig is concerned about the pervasiveness of fake news and misinformation

Report

The analysis explores various perspectives on trust, expertise, open discussions, political responsibility, transparency in science, bias in science, and the prevalence of fake news and misinformation. One key finding is that a significant majority of people in 70 different countries trust science.

This conclusion is supported by research led by Victoria Colonia and conducted in a wide range of countries, which found that 98 to 99 percent of people trust science. However, the analysis also reveals a growing mistrust towards experts. This trend has been observed in relation to events such as Brexit, the pandemic, and ongoing climate change issues.

The argument put forth is that these events have caused confusion and uncertainty, leading to a decline in trust towards experts. Another concern raised is the phenomenon of “echo chambers,” where discussions are held in tightly-knit circles where people only agree with each other.

This can inhibit the exchange of diverse perspectives and hinder the growth of knowledge. In contrast, the argument is made for the value of open discussions and debates that encourage disagreement and the robust examination of ideas. The analysis also highlights the problem of politicians manipulating facts and truth.

For instance, President Trump is cited as having made over 30,000 false or misleading claims during his presidency. The argument posits that politicians should be held accountable and strive for factual accuracy, irrespective of their position. Transparency in science is another important aspect raised in the analysis.

It is emphasised that scientific decisions should be transparently nominated and explained to the general public. The importance of scientists communicating not only amongst themselves but also with the wider public is stressed, particularly in the context of post-COVID decision-making processes.

Bias in science and its potential politicisation are also noted as worthy of concern. The analysis questions the potential inherent bias and political inclinations that may influence scientific research and findings. This raises the need for critical evaluation and a better understanding of the potential bias that can exist in scientific discourse.

The discussion on trust and expertise inevitably leads to the issue of fake news and misinformation. The pervasiveness of these phenomena is seen as detrimental to public discourse and can undermine trust in credible sources of information. The analysis explores the need for better methods of identifying and combating fake news and misinformation, particularly through media literacy education.

In conclusion, the analysis provides insights into the complexities surrounding trust, expertise, open discussions, political responsibility, transparency in science, bias in science, and fake news/misinformation. It highlights the trust people have in science but also the growing distrust towards experts.

It advocates for open discussions and debates, the accountability of politicians, transparency in science, and the identification of fake news and misinformation. The analysis prompts further consideration of these issues and the need for ongoing efforts to foster trust, critical thinking, and reliable information in various domains of society.