- During my week of exploring music psychology @RealScientists , we were discussing public policy and how scientists and indeed everyone should be thinking about influencing it. Examples were drawn from social policy and we were having a robust discussion on how evidence is used and also torqued to support partisan positions.
- — realscientists (@realscientists)Thu, Nov 03 2016 01:17:19Absolutely! Social policy sh/ concern all of us. So this is putting science to work in a very specific way - bringing evidence to the table
- — realscientists (@realscientists)Thu, Nov 03 2016 01:18:02I don't see this as merely a social science issue; it impacts everyone. Being canny about policy is important.
- — realscientists (@realscientists)Thu, Nov 03 2016 01:51:54Being vocal helps. Armed with facts & a strategy, there's much than can be done. But it takes time and patience (usually).
- To widen the debate, I brought up the example of climate change. This is a prime example of the work that natural scientists do needing to be used to create better public policy.
- — realscientists (@realscientists)Thu, Nov 03 2016 01:55:34Let's take an example from natural sciences: Climate change. Why can we not get better policy up on this issue? It's literally killing us.
- — realscientists (@realscientists)Thu, Nov 03 2016 01:56:19I think most ppl intellectually understand we need to make changes. But from the comfort of our own lives we are waiting for gov't to do it.
- — realscientists (@realscientists)Thu, Nov 03 2016 01:57:53I'm using this example b/c I want to emphasise the importance of advocacy in science & academia. The ivory tower is a myth.
- — The Answer-Man (@ebonstorm)Thu, Nov 03 2016 02:16:42@realscientists Science can present the facts but we need to be stronger, better communicators to deal with policy creators.
- — u=v(l)eslie (@LeslieWheat)Thu, Nov 03 2016 02:16:26Absolutely. Science has never been good at extrapolating data in ways the public understands. See: lack of climate change policy. https://twitter.com/realscientists/status/793994679419367425 …
- As if on cue, this response came in. We then worked through 24 hours of evidence being presented but not accepted.
- — Nihils Bore (@_T0M_V_)Thu, Nov 03 2016 05:10:18
- — alison (@alisonborealis)Thu, Nov 03 2016 02:24:02
- — Arun Dayanandan (@arun_dayanandan)Thu, Nov 03 2016 02:36:05
- — Roomy Dodge (@WildBilbo)Thu, Nov 03 2016 03:06:51@realscientists Boiling frog theory; we don't act (jump out) till we're already cooked because the changes are too gradual to notice.
- — Roomy Dodge (@WildBilbo)Thu, Nov 03 2016 03:29:50
- — Roomy Dodge (@WildBilbo)Thu, Nov 03 2016 03:31:47
- — ange|:que © (@organicperson)Thu, Nov 03 2016 05:44:14
- — 0_okay (@calypsoh13)Thu, Nov 03 2016 03:19:55
Real Scientists Addendum: Is climate change literally killing us?
Public policy, evidence, and a very specific case study on climate change. Nobody predicted this...
bySusan Maury3 Views