Letter to the Editor: Writer lists ‘shortcomings’ on science, gender dysphoria, climate

I found serious shortcomings in Thomas C. Patterson’s recent commentary that started off with a ramble about a medical journal’s editorials about a social problem in the U.K. (“Politicizing science ‘degrades medicine,’” July 9). I wonder why he thinks we should be interested in the nitty-gritty of immigration problems in the United Kingdom over the immigration problems of the USA.

Patterson stumbles into his next mess by saying “science and scientists are in reputational decline because, well, they deserve to be.” He really did not explain that sentence. I remember, when I was young, science was better respected and better understood. My perception today is that more of the general public is surprisingly not only anti-science but also has a worse understanding of what science is. During my career in science — starting with my college graduation in 1966 — I have followed a lot of controversies. My advice: Don’t try to argue with the experts who know a lot more about the subject than you do. I learned that the hard way when I argued with people who were way better informed than myself.

Part of the low-quality thinking presented in the commentary is probably due to many bad factors, such as large numbers of people now getting their low-quality news from social networks, instead of high-quality regular mainstream news. This goads people into anger by a social feedback gimmick that gives “reward points” for popularity rather than truth. Also, there are whole new industries that deliberately inject disinformation into the social networks. Part of this is called “pink slime journalism.” Opinion-forming public relations campaigns are also out there, trying to con people into understanding a biased position as if it were the whole truth. Focused thinking is replaced by hucksterized thinking (where brainwashers dishonestly pull the wool over your eyes). In another trend, serious thought is being replaced with “angertainment.” Here is one more: Look up “The Brainwashing of My Dad.” Jen Senko produced a DVD of the same title that I saw years ago. It is a bombshell. Her website is thebrainwashingofmydad.com.

A lot of misunderstandings come out of people who fall into some kind of a cult. The recent big shock to me was a former president claiming (as a cult leader) that his run for reelection was denied because the election was stolen. The even bigger shock was that about 1 out of 3 Americans (the cult members) were totally taken in by this lie. And they still feel this way today, even though very significant and growing numbers of more rational and very respectable Republicans said there was almost nothing wrong with the election. And the cult leader is sinking in a quicksand of serious legal problems.

Patterson gets into the topic of gender dysphoria by being more unhelpful than helpful. What I know about the topic is that gender confusion exists probably everywhere at some low level, but it has been rarely discussed until recent years. They are called “hijra” in India, “kathoey” and “ladyboys” in Cambodia and “muxes” in Mexico. And they are all abused and kicked around.

Patterson ends his essay by clearly showing that he cannot see or understand the climate elephant in the room. It is right there staring everyone in the face, right now: There have been widespread reports already this month of the hottest global temperatures ever recorded. And the temperature trends are headed in a bad direction.

Within the next decade, we may see more crop failures, higher prices and empty shelves at the grocery stores. On the hottest days, we are going to sweat out whether our air conditioning and power grids will hold up. Will climate deniers finally see that elephant in the room?

Arthur E. Sowers

Harbeson