If you like my work, buy me a virtual cup of coffee at Ko-Fi.

For years, the concept of “science” as been politicized, as if it were possessed ONLY by one political party, as if the other political party and its members were still in the literal stone age.

Worse, this party says “I believe in science” as if science were a theology or philosophy. A Christian would say “I believe in Jesus” because the Bible says belief alone in Jesus is significant and leads to eternal life.

But how can you “believe” in science? What is science?

According to the Understanding Science page at the UC Museum of Paleontology at the University of California at Berkeley (just to assure my critics that I’m not citing from some far-right, dodgy, unintellectual source):

Science is both a body of knowledge and a process. In school, science may sometimes seem like a collection of isolated and static facts listed in a textbook, but that’s only a small part of the story. Just as importantly, science is also a process of discovery that allows us to link isolated facts into coherent and comprehensive understandings of the natural world.

I tend to reframe that definition to say that science is a standardized, methodical examination of anything in the observable universe. It’s a lot of asking questions. It’s also continuing to test information believed to be substantiated even decades ago. Nothing is static in science. We’re learning new things and upgrading our understanding of our world daily.

The Berkeley source also says:

Science is ongoing. Science is continually refining and expanding our knowledge of the universe, and as it does, it leads to new questions for future investigation. Science will never be “finished.”

Ah ha! The science is NEVER “settled.” Anyone who says so doesn’t understand science.

But when I say science is a standardized method of investigation, what does that mean?

ScienceBuddies.org has a nice article and video explaining the steps in the Scientific Method. It might take a few minutes to go through everything, but that’s okay. Well, it’s okay for anyone who really wants to understand science as a concept and a method of study and not just use it as a one-second talking point.

Here’s a diagram from that webpage.

Here’s a more humorous example in a comic strip created by Nathan W. Pyle (no relation):

As you can see, it’s common in a scientific endeavor to not always come to a viable conclusion. Believe that science, too.

That all seems pretty straightforward. So why or even how could one political party say they “believe in science” and what sort of “science” do they believe.

According to Damaan, AKA “Philly’s Finest”! who is one of those (probably) paid pundits and activists supporting, uplifting, and advertising one political party, this is why he isn’t a Republican.

For the record, I’m not a Democrat or a Republican but rather a right-leaning independent. I don’t like being reduced down to a bunch of bullet points or a meme.

So if you DON’T “believe in science,” you get to be a bunch of other horrible political talking points, too.

What the “I believe in science” folks are actually saying as far as I can tell is they support certain behaviors and beliefs that supposedly originate from a scientific inquiry.

COVID-19: More information is coming to light about the former pandemic now. For instance, multiple sources reveal that Dr. Anthony Fauci has admitted the six-foot social distancing rule was NOT based on science. However it was framed that way for the past several years. That, and the other directives coming from Fauci, the Center for Disease Control (CDC), and other government sources, certainly made it seem as if we MUST comply to their commandments from on high. If not we “don’t believe in science.”

Climate Change: This has been a debate where supposedly the “science has been settled” for quite some time. Nevertheless, there are people who are pushing back, not necessarily about whether or not the global climate is changing, but how it’s changing, to what degree, and what are the causal factors. If you “believe in science,” then (again) you must believe in the government (and we’ve seen how government officials and general scientific investigation doesn’t always yield infallible results) and do everything to comply with their conclusions, especially in giving the government money.

Transgender Ideology: Supposedly science supports the subjective view of any person who believes their gender identity does not conform to their sex “assigned” at birth. I put “assigned” in quotes because that assignment typically results from the direct observation of the newborn baby’s genitals. In the vast, vast, vast majority of cases, if you have a penis, you’re male, and if you have a vagina, you’re female. Now this may not be so in all situations, but the prevalence and even popularity in trans, gender fluid and gender non-conforming identities are resulting in a power surge of people, particularly teens and pre-teens, in coming out. Medicine, like science, is not perfect, and there’s evidence that gender dysphoria is being over diagnosed. That means there’s a lot of kids being deemed “trans” who really aren’t (I have a much longer discussion on this HERE).

I’m sure there are other political points where we are required to “believe in science,” but for me, these are the big three.

So this political party “believes in science” but only looking through a very narrow telescope. All other scientific areas of study are irrelevant as it doesn’t serve their social and political agenda.

Science is about asking questions. When activists and the government say that the issues and details around COVID-19, climate change, and trans ideology cannot and must not be questioned, that’s not science, that’s dogma.

I found a nice article written by a K-12 grade science teacher asking Why Do People Say, “I Believe in Science”?. She describes the difference between believing and understanding science.

Actually, given that scientific investigation permeates just about every aspect of our lives, it would be heard to argue that “science” doesn’t exist. It would take a total fanatic to say that, for example, God made everything in a way that we can NEVER understand, that we aren’t supposed to ask questions about the universe around us, and that all scientists everywhere and across history are pawns of atheists, Satanists, and the government (yes, there are a few nut cases out there).

The fact is, some of the most noteworthy scientists in history were and are devout Christians. Click the link to be illuminated.

My doctor (now retired) is a Christian. My wife’s good friend and a retired nurse is also Christian. A number of software developers I’ve known in my career are Christian. Using or being a part of the scientific method is not mutually exclusive to a belief in the metaphysical (which science cannot examine because it is not part of our observable universe) and faith in God.

I say that both to the atheists who actually do seem to believe it, but also for those few Christians I’ve met who seem to believe the same thing.

Science is not the enemy of religion nor is religion the enemy of science. They both look at the world from two different perspectives. Occasionally, we see where they align.

The “I believe in science” people aren’t concerned with science. They’re concerned with manipulating public opinion that anyone religious (which oddly enough should include professed Catholic President Joe Biden) and anyone politically and socially conservative is at least stupid if not totally evil. That also casts said “science believers” as more enlightened, more intelligent, of high moral caliber (in spite of the fact that the Bible provides an abundance of moral instruction) and just plain “better” than anyone else. As much as anything, it’s the original poster’s certification of ego-inflation.

Oh, given that these are not celebrities, that they have tens to hundreds of thousands of followers is thanks to them buying blocks of followers from specialized websites. It’s all smoke and mirrors.

Also, keep in mind many of these “activists” are paid to take such positions on social media and can best be categorized as clickbait.

I like “Doc” Brown, but even in fiction, it took him thirty years from developing a concept to an actual working model. Science isn’t magic.