When our readers get upset, we hear it. The insults fly: Liar. Jerk. Sock puppet. Propagandist. Criminal. Corporate slut, to name just a few. And in a recent Op-Ed in the Baltimore Sun we explained why Wi-Fi is safe. That's when the pitchforks came out.
anti-science
"Lying" is considered one of those words civilized people should never say. That's why politicians never use it. Instead, their opponents are "misinformed" or "misspeaking" or "using alternative facts."
Well, the time for civility is over. Journalist -- if we can actually call him that -- Danny Hakim is lying to you. And it's not his first rodeo, either. He's built quite a track record for himself at the New York Times, publishing distorted information about GMOs and comparing agricultural pesticides to "Nazi-made sarin gas."
The guidelines were born of good intentions; created to make Americans healthier. However, they were not inscribed on stone tablets and handed to mankind. Instead, the guidelines are the result of a bureaucratic process and, as such, are susceptible to dubious conclusions and adverse influence by activist groups.
Junk science is everywhere. This is why our mission is so important. If journalists and advocates don't speak up for good science, cranks and quacks will take over. As part of our ongoing effort to eradicate nonsense, here's our list of the top junk science stories we debunked this year.
The prestigious school is growing its list of misguided "experts" while thoroughly undermining its great reputation. Columbia's latest hire is former New York Times food writer Mark Bittman, who calls biotechnology "overrated" while endorsing the mandatory labeling of GMOs, a policy rejected by every major mainstream medical and scientific organization in America.
There isn't a fringe movement that Robert F. Kennedy, Jr doesn't like. He appears to subscribe to conspiracy theories involving the assassination of his uncle, JFK, and he's one of America's most prominent disbelievers in vaccine usage. Now, Mr Kennedy is joining the protesters at the Dakota Access Pipeline.
During a recent monologue Bill Maher instructed America on the importance of knowledge. He's right, of course, but the talkshow host is a rather imperfect messenger: Listening to him is like receiving a lecture from Bill Clinton or Donald Trump on the importance of marital fidelity. Maher's political viewpoint was illuminating, but probably not in the way he had hoped.
Why America's supposed newspaper of record has become a voice for anti-biotechnology food activists remains a profound mystery. Maybe it's calculated, in that the paper is tailoring its reportage to its customers, consisting of mostly affluent, organic-food-eating elites. Evidence plays a small part in the Times' coverage of controversial scientific issues.
Once the weapon of choice for prepubescent teens, cyberbullying is now deployed, with ruthless efficiency, against PhDs who have committed the unspeakable crime of conducting research on, and publicly advocating, GMOs. The goal is straightforward: Biotech scientists must be destroyed professionally. Failing that, they must be destroyed emotionally.
A proposed resolution by the New York State PTA, to be voted on at their November convention, supports mandatory labeling and a GMO ban from school food. The resolution, which is shocking coming from an organization that, is packed full of pseudoscientific thinking and anti-biotechnology propaganda.
One of the latest contributions from the Huffington Post to the national dialogue comes courtesy of self-described teenage "food safety activist" Rachel Parent, who skyrocketed to fame after giving an anti-GMO talk for Tedx, and debating Kevin O'Leary. Her new article is titled "GMO Propaganda Has No Place In Your Child's Classroom." She then goes on to regurgitate her own propaganda.
If you are educated by Google, you see Deniers for Hire have called us a "pro-industry front group" - Greenpeace, Mother Jones, NRDC, U.S. Right to Know, and SourceWatch, the whole cabal. The problem with their argument (other than the fact it is ad hominem) is that, if it really was true that ACSH is a corporate shill, we would have to be really, really bad at it, given our content.