The assertion that “settled science” exists is often dismissed by certain political figures who seek to challenge scientifically established truths. This rhetoric, popularized by various populists, aims to promote fringe scientific views that align with their agendas. For instance, in 2020, Nancy Mace, a Republican Representative, responded to a question about climate change by claiming that “the science is never settled.” Similarly, Roger Marshall, a U.S. senator, suggested that further funding should be allocated to investigate debunked theories linking vaccines to autism, stating, “Science is never settled.” This sentiment has also been echoed across the Atlantic, with Nigel Farage expressing indifference towards expert opinions on controversial scientific claims.
While it is true that science evolves with new evidence, many fundamental scientific concepts, such as the theory of evolution or the principles of gravity, are widely accepted and have been thoroughly tested. To suggest otherwise misrepresents the consensus within the scientific community. According to Kit Yates, a professor of mathematical biology at the University of Bath, the idea that global cooling was once a scientific consensus is a misconception. Historical reviews indicate that concerns about global warming were prevalent even in the 1970s, and the current understanding that climate change is primarily driven by human-induced greenhouse gas emissions remains a strong consensus.
Scientific knowledge does change over time, as evidenced by the evolution of gravity theories. Galileo established that all objects accelerate at the same rate due to gravity, a concept later expanded by Isaac Newton into a comprehensive theory of gravitation. However, as science progressed, limitations of Newton”s theories became apparent, leading to the development of Albert Einstein“s general relativity, which provided a more nuanced understanding of gravity, particularly in extreme conditions. Yet, even general relativity is not without its limitations, as it does not completely explain phenomena within black holes.
Despite these developments, earlier theories remain valid within their respective contexts. For instance, Newton”s laws are still applicable in various situations, illustrating that settled science can coexist with evolving knowledge. Other scientific principles, such as the theory of evolution and germ theory, are similarly considered settled, though they too have been refined over time.
Moreover, the notion of scientific “facts” often leads to misunderstandings. While most agree that the Earth is round, the definition of a “fact” can vary. Science relies on evidence and induction, which means that while it cannot offer absolute certainty, it can provide strong evidence that supports a particular interpretation. This is particularly true for well-established concepts like the second law of thermodynamics or the heliocentric model of our solar system.
While uncertainty is inherent in scientific inquiry, this does not imply that one should adopt a neutral stance on well-supported scientific claims. Politicians who claim that “science is never settled” often seek to create false equivalences regarding scientific issues, undermining the established consensus. It is essential to recognize that while scientific knowledge can grow and adapt, the foundation of settled science remains robust against challenges, offering reliable explanations within its scope.
