Scientists and policymakers need to be more humble in their claims of what they know.
How much weight would you put on a scientist’s expertise versus the opinion of a random stranger? People on either end of the political spectrum decide differently what seems true.
Many published studies fail to fully and accurately report how the study was conducted and what was found.
The new railway might destroy some wildlife habitats but what if it helps tackle climate change?
Billboards spreading misinformation on the risks of vaccination have popped up around American cities. A bioethicist explains why decisions not to vaccinate children are indefensible.
From human ‘gills’ to reproducing rock, evidence hasn’t always pointed scientists in the right direction.
All the proofs in the world won’t change a convinced flat earther’s mind.
Four scientists talk through the ways they now build outreach into their work as a way to spread their research’s impact – something that wasn’t the norm for past generations of academics.
The local Aboriginal people told stories and painted images of a massacre of their ancestors in the early 20th century, but there was no other evidence that the incident took place. Until now.
Promising scientific consensus is a perilous principle on which to found meaningful engagement between experts and the public.
Using mind reading technologies in court could become common practice.
Populist movements are on the rise. Their supporters distrust the establishment, elites, authority and official sources. The post-truth world is a post-expert world.
In science, the word ‘theory’ has a very specific meaning that’s easy for nonscientists to misunderstand or misconstrue. Here’s what a theory must withstand to be accepted by the scientific community.