This year’s wildfire season is predicted to be of epic proportions , with a record 5.5. to 8 million acres likely to burn across the United States. The fire danger is amplified by drought as a result of historically high temperatures. Yet not everyone recognizes that cause of the looming disaster. Fewer than half of Americans believe that human activity is changing the climate at all, in spite of overwhelming 99.9 percent scientific consensus .
This disconnect is one example of a pervasive case against science that is not limited to climate change. Vaccination, teaching of evolution in schools, or responses to pandemics are all being questioned. Typically, the argument is not that the science is wrong; it is that science cannot be trusted. The case against science is that it is unreliable. The claims are that climate science is not settled yet, evolution is just a theory, and vaccines have not been sufficiently tested.
In all those debates, the case follows a very similar playbook: to undermine trust in established scientific understanding all one needs to do is create doubt. Cherry-picking data, citing a lone dissenting scientist, or promoting unproven theories all contribute to spreading confusion. For example, some opponents of vaccines still quote debunked studies, such as a publication in Lancet that linked the MMR vaccine to autism, which was retracted 16 years ago.