Why do stories trump science?

Columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. nails an issue again (“Artificial outrage,” Aug. 17). But artificial outrage is just a predictable product of manufactured doubt. As if we didn’t have enough uncertainty in every walk of life, there is a well-funded strategy to spread doubt about scientific research. Doubt paralyzes efforts toward future policies, actions and solutions.

Skepticism is one thing. Questioning authority is how democracy slowly advances. Human brains have been called “belief engines” that try to find patterns that make sense of what is happening. Unfortunately, difficult science is not always readily trusted by these belief engines. Scientific conclusions often lose to more compelling – but less factual – storytelling, particularly when such storytelling raises more questions.

Consider global warming. Despite a broad consensus, there remains scientific uncertainty about the complex causes and consequences of global warming. Good science is reluctant to make absolute statements; it just doesn’t work that way. But people can oppose pragmatic decision-making by simply manufacturing doubt.

There are other important areas – food safety, product safety, agronomic and energy systems – that are complex and difficult to sort out. Why manufacture paralyzing doubt? Follow the money.

Terry Lawhead

Spokane