Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics

Wow. Just wow. Yesterday, Kellyanne Conway disclosed to the world news of the "Bowling Green Massacre."

And some people believed her.

I guess it's no surprise in the current political climate (where half the country think that "gaslighting" refers to some romantic mood set by this administration) that making up what are easily debunked stories is considered acceptable for "news."

When we have the need for articles with headlines like this:

10 Journalism Brands Where You Find Real Facts Rather than Alternative Facts

you know we've gone down the rabbit hole into a world turned upside down. Since when have we had to use the word REAL in front of the word facts? Isn't that redundant? If a story isn't real, it's fiction.

How has the term "alt-facts" become a thing? If facts aren't real, they aren't facts. As any writer knows, words have specific meanings, and those meanings have power. Choose and wield your words as you would a surgical instrument--for precision. A scalpel, not a mallet. Know and use the correct instrument. The correct, precise word for alternative facts is LIES. 

While the GOP, and particularly this administration, are masters in the art of lying, and their followers are happy to be led down that garden path, I blame liberals for starting us down that path with the oh-so-trite and misleading axiom that "perception is reality."

Not when your perception is incorrect it's not. Then, it's a misperception. 

This ridiculous and patently false phrase became quite de rigueur in the late 90s and early 00s. It's echoes can still be heard in many halls and offices where agencies are trying to accomplish goals related to complex scientific ideas that a vast majority of the population don't have the educational or intellectual foundation to fully grasp. (Think climate change communication, think astrophysics, think stem cell research.)

This is not to say the audiences are stupid, but they didn't get sufficient science education at the requisite level to understand all the many disciplines and concepts at play. Just because you took A & P in college doesn't make you a doctor. A medical doctor spent many years learning all she needed to know to get that title. Similarly, understanding the natural world means spending years learning the many and complex concepts, strategies, and processes involved. That 100-level science class that you may, possibly--or not--have had as a freshman in college (and may or may not remember at all) doesn't begin to provide a complete picture on which it build an accurate framework, nor does it make you an "expert."

For the layman, actual, factual information and explanations of any specialized field can sound like gobbledy-gook. The easy, comforting sound bite is easier to digest. Filled with misperceptions, these at least give people something to latch onto. The easier they are to understand, the more comforting they are, the better.

Although the thinking behind "perception is reality" as applied to learning is solid---before we can learn new information, our misconceptions must be identified and addressed, then those can be corrected with factual information--what's happened is we've been too accommodating of the misperceptions. We did a great job of recognizing the misperceptions, but stopped short of correcting them. We bastardized "Respect other people's opinions" into accepting that all opinions are just as valid as facts. We let the mantra that "not everyone has to think the same," extrapolate into "being wrong about facts is just as valid as the facts themselves."

Those cliches about the validity of opinions and varied views are only true when we're talking about subjective topics like beliefs, and phenomenon that aren't subject to scientific evaluation to determine whether or not they're factual. Your taste and preference in food, art, music, your religious beliefs--those are subjective. They depend on individual perception and circumstance: how, when, and where you were raised, what you're accustomed to. There is no right or wrong, just different.

Scientific facts aren't that. They are objective and evidence-based. They are built on observation, measurement, and verification. The scientific method starts with a hypothesis (perception), but then it goes further and validates that hypothesis, or corrects it, through experimentation and evidence. Misperceptions are identified, addressed, and corrected through the scientific method. Repeat after me:

MISPERCEPTION IS NOT REALITY. IT IS WRONG.

Now go learn the facts. If the subject matter is too complex, find someone who really is an expert in that field to help you understand it. HINT: Politicians are not experts in any field other than getting re-elected.

How do you--or I, or anyone--keep from getting caught up in the hysteria of "alt facts," aka lies and damn lies, flooding social media and even some (not particularly credible) alt-news sources? Here are few ideas:

1.   

Follow only credible news sources. Here's that list of 10 good places to start. Don't believe these? You might want to subscribe to Stars and Stripes, the US Military news source. Each year, they get blasted by half their readers for having a left bias, and the other half for having a right bias. Pretty strong evidence they're neutral. They also select a panel, balanced between newspaper editors and publishers considered left- and right-leaning, to evaluate a random selection of news stories they published in the past year and rate the "slant." Again, they typically come out in the center.

2.  

Check out the Poynter Institute's many online courses on news- and media- literacy designed to help you understand and evaluate news stories and news sources to determine their credibility. They also offer a number of online courses in fact-checking.

Finally, since the title of this blog is lies, damn lies, and statistics, let me address that last one: the dreaded "s-word." Many people have learned nothing more about statistics than this quaint phrase, often attributed incorrectly to Mark Twain. The actual, verifiable source (and who Mark Twain himself credited as such) is British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli. 

Image from http://likesuccess.com/img14429

Statistics is nothing more than math. It's a way to evaluate your numbers--the data you've gathered--to determine if they're meaningful and accurate, or if the results are random and arbitrary. Our brains like to put order on chaos. We see patterns when they may not exist. Statistics gives us a way to check our own biases and determine if the imposed and supposed pattern actually exists. 

Can statistics be used to lie? Not really. They can, however, be used to confound those who are ignorant of how statistics work. One oft-seen example is when news sources report on poll results. Turn to one channel and you'll hear, "Polls show that 24 percent of people support the president's actions." Yeah! Look at that! Clearly, he's doing the right thing. 

At least, that's what it may seems like to someone who doesn't actually understand math and statistics. Turn the channel and you hear the same story, reporting the same statistic: Seventy-six percent of the people polled oppose whatever that action is.

Spin? Yes and no. It depends on if you know your numbers. As I tell my students, statistics can only be used to lie to those who don't know statistics. 

3. 

If you don't want to be lied to, learn statistics.

The End and Beginning: Life in a Post-Obama World

We observe today not a victory of party, but a celebration of freedom — symbolizing an end, as well as a beginning — signifying renewal, as well as change.--John F. Kennedy, in his inaugural address on January 20, 1961

JFK's Inauguration Speech. (Photo from NP.org)

In the current situation, and following Barack Obama's eloquent, elegant, and deeply meaningful Farewell address last night, it seems appropriate today to tweak those words a bit:

We observe today not a celebration of freedom, but a victory of party--symbolizing an end to civility and democracy, as well as a beginning--signifying reversal, as well as demise.--Lynne M. Hinkey, in my paraphrasing of Kennedy's speech.

I've been succumbing to the temptation to follow Timothy Leary's advice and "turn on, tune in, and drop out." In my case, the turning on involved a lot of wine, the tuning in focused on the news (not the fiction fed to gullible folks via Breitbart, Fox, and other propaganda sources but the real news, found through due diligence, investigation, and critical thinking, that takes some effort), and the  dropping out of the echo chamber of Facebook.

Timothy Leary at UC Berkely (Photo from NBCUniversalArchives.com

Last night, hearing Obama's inspiring words recounting his feats (made more remarkable because they were achieved despite an obstructionist GOP Congress doing all they could to bring the country to its knees), and urging us all to stay engaged, I started to rethink my dropping out. Obama reminded us of George Washington's words to "be those anxious, jealous guardians of our democracy; to embrace the joyous task we’ve been given to continually try to improve this great nation of ours. Because for all our outward differences, we all share the same proud title: Citizen."

Those words resonated with me, with my beliefs, my life, with all I've worked for throughout my life: to continuously improve this great nation. My small piece of that very large picture has been in the realm of marine science and science literacy, whether in community outreach and extension programs, science communication, training coastal resource management professionals, or instructing the next generation, my mission has focused on ensuring the development or use of critical thinking skills, finding and evidence-based information derived from rigorous scientific process rather that opinion pulled out of someone's ass because it;s comfortable, easy, or benefits some person or company's bottom line.

It's not much, but it's what I can do. Now, more than ever, we all have to do our parts, small as they may be. (Given the global implications of our science literacy or our science ignorance with regard to climate change, food security, energy independence and renewables, maintaining academic and scientific integrity and rigor in STEM fields isn't small at all, is it?)

Kennedy's speech is primarily remembered for the line, "Ask not what your country can do for you--ask what you can do for your country." Despite my revision above, much of Kennedy's Inauguration Speech is as instructive and relevant today as it was fifty-six years ago. It's worth a thorough read, worth a reminder. Worth reiterating this notice:

Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans — born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage — and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world...

Perhaps Russia had in mind these words from Kennedy when they chose to interfere in our elections, promulgating fake news stories and feeding them to the gullible folks at Breitbart to be passed on to their equally gullible readers: United, there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided, there is little we can do — for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder.

In the words of Abbie Hoffman, "The only way to support a revolution is to create your own." My revolution is a commitment to sound, solid science education, to ensuring critical thinking skills. I will provide my students with a secure foundation for reasoning, demonstrating and demanding not only the questioning of information, but also helping them to develop the research skills that will enable them to find and evaluate factual, relevant information. I refuse to surrender to ignorance, to legitimizing opinion over evidence.

Abbie Hoffman (photo from maxskansascity.om)

Obama reminded me that turning on, tuning in, and dropping out aren't what's needed, especially now. "Ultimately, that’s what our democracy demands. It needs you. Not just when there’s an election, not just when your own narrow interest is at stake, but over the full span of a lifetime..."

I am sincerely grateful to this president, our president, Barack Hussein Obama, for reminding me that my responsibility to this country and to democracy is not to recoil in horror and hide when it's threatened by the overwhelming, blatant ignorance as it now is. My responsibility--all of our responsibility and what's demanded of each of us as good citizens of this country, now more than ever is to 

Show up. Dive in. Persevere.

Barack H. Obama II, 44th President of the USA. (Photo from Elle.com)

ON THE "EDUCATED, LIBERAL ELITE" or Why Critical Thinking Skills are so Critical

I've had enough! I know I'm not alone. If I hear one more ridiculous claim about the vast left-wing conspiracy at colleges and universities across the country to brainwash young minds into being 'liberals', I'm going to cry--as soon as I'm done laughing over the stupidity of that statement.

Who in the world started THAT ridiculous piece of tripe? Let's consider the argument: Most "liberals" are college educated, most college professors are liberals, therefore, the professors brainwash students to become liberal thinkers.

Wow! I want to meet the brilliant mastermind behind THAT plan. Anyone who can organize such a huge effort and get vast numbers of “radical, left-wing academics” to work together should be in charge of our military and our government because if you can make that happen, you can obviously coordinate ANYTHING.

I guess the same conspiracy theorists who thought up this one have never heard of Okkam's Razor. That's a theorem that says if there are multiple possible explanations for something the simplest one is probably true. Hmmmm--could it be a vast, nationwide, left-wing conspiracy to brainwash millions of young adults, or that a quality education that teaches critical thinking skills results in the ability to THINK? Which could possibly be the simpler, saner, and more reasonable explanation?

The primary objective of a good education, at any level, is not to have students memorize facts and figures, but to give them problem solving skills. Much of elementary and high school is memorizing because we have to start with some basic vocabulary and concepts. But memorizing and learning are two different things--memorizing can help learning, but parroting back the correct words isn't necessarily comprehending what they mean, or being able to apply those concepts to other areas.

A monkey can memorize which buttons to push to fly a spacecraft without understanding how the rockets work; rats memorize mazes all the time. Memorization is not a higher level cognitive function. Rote memorization results in blind agreement with (and obedience to) what you've been told is the answer. That amounts to unquestioningly towing the party line, regardless of whether it makes sense or not because you were told that was the "right" answer. As Rush tells his listeners, "You don't have to try to figure out what to think, I'll tell you what to think." What he really means, is that if you gather and analyze all the information to see if the arguments are valid, you'd come to a different conclusion.

Memorizing is the first step  in the learning process, but it isn't the whole process. After that, you have to understand what those words mean, then apply them, then analyze them to draw conclusions and synthesize that information into a broader context. THAT is critical thinking. It's a higher level in the learning process--one that our brains aren't even wired for until we're in our late-teens or early-20s.

Critical thinking is a process to find answers, as opposed to being given the answer. Critical thinking is learned, particularly through the sciences and mathematics. These disciplines are based on problem-solving to discover answers, not on being told the answer. This is the kind of thinking the Texas GOP wanted to ban from being taught in schools because it results in students "questioning" their beliefs. If by beliefs, they mean misperceptions, fallacies, misinformation and lies, they're correct.

I don't see anything wrong with questioning those things. How can anyone truly and wholeheartedly believe in something that won't stand up to analysis? I would think if you truly believe something to be true, you'd want it questioned again and again and again. The more times you demonstrate that something is not wrong, the stronger the proof that it is right.

Oh, wait...that describes the scientific method, the ultimate critical thinking tool! Scientists continuously try to prove that their belief, their hypothesis about something, is wrong. They question it in every way possible. Every time we demonstrate that a hypothesis is not wrong, we gain evidence that it is correct. Because there are an infinite number of variables that can affect the outcome, we can rarely say we've "proven" anything,  but with more and more evidence showing it isn't wrong, the slimmer the possibility that it is, i.e., the more certain we can be that our answer is right.

The Scientific Method = Evidence-based Problem Solving using Critical Thinking

Without questioning, without attempting to disprove one's beliefs, there is no support for those beliefs. They are just opinions. Scientists work on solid, measurable evidence. That's what students are taught in science classes as part of their "liberal" education. A real education doesn't tell students the answers. It gives them the tools they need to find the answers. A well-educated person doesn't have all the answers, but they have the ability to identify the real questions, find the resources to help answer those questions, the mental wherewithal to evaluate those resources to determine if they're factual or opinion-based, and the ability to work through the data and information to come up with the best answer to the problem. It's a lot of work.

Is it any surprise that the 'educated liberal elite' are more left-leaning than those who don't, can't, or won't take the time and effort to critically consider and analyze the issues? Not at all. If you've learned critical thinking skills and learned to differentiate fact from opinion, hypothesis from hype, you will apply those skills in your life. The simplest answer to why a preponderance of college-educated people are more middle or left-leaning in their political views is that they've learned how to think through issues and come up with logical conclusions based on factual information. Rather than believe what they're told by radio and TV pundits--from either side of the political divide--they question all of them, investigate, sort fact from fiction, and reason from opinion. The conclusions drawn from actually researching the issues don't tend to fall nicely and neatly into any one party-line. Particularly not the party line that tells us "this is the right answer, if you question it, you're unpatriotic" or worse yet (in their sad little minds), "a liberal." 

That would be the same party that tells us smaller government is good–after they took the deficit to record numbers and expand the government into the largest bureaucracy in the history of the US between 2000 and 2008. No one with the capability for abstract thought could reconcile those words and actions. Of course any sane, rational person would question the discrepancy between their words and deeds. How gullible do you have to be to believe someone who says they "stand for middle-class Americans and small town folks" while those same Americans were being evicted from their houses while big financial institutes were bailed out and their executives rewarded with trips and bonuses? (And before any of my right-leaning friends take offense, bear in mind, the political spectrum is a continuum. You may interpret your position as "right" but I'd be willing to bet you aren't on that end of the spectrum arguing to abolish critical thinking skills, dismantle education, or put creationism in the science classroom. In today's world, that makes you a moderate, and by some GOP accounting, it makes you a flaming liberal!)

I don't believe a college education makes anyone smarter. There are many fields of study where rote memorization is sufficient and many people in those fields have never developed critical thinking skills. It doesn't mean they don't possess knowledge, skills, or expertise in their field. What thinking critically and a quality education give us, is not just information but the ability to acquire it, understand it, analyze it, and apply it, regardless of the discipline. That takes time, effort and practice. It takes time to go beyond the sound-bite on the news shows, to look at congressional voting records, to locate legislation, to read and understand it, to see how it's being interpreted and applied. It's hard work, not of a physical kind, but of an intellectual kind. And it's time consuming. It's so much easier and faster to believe that chain e-mail, to unquestioningly follow party lines, to only read sources that are "approved" or sponsored by your preferred party, and to believe that there are only two answers to any issue: "with us” or “against us".

I'm sick of the unfounded, fear-based attacks on intelligence and education. Do you think there could be a correlation between the GOP's increasing attacks on education and our ever-falling rank in the world in science and math? Of course there is. We need to value education and learning rather than perpetuate the myth of "common sense." Common means average, our country deserves more than mediocre.

"Common" would be right there in the middle, where most people are.
Wouldn't uncommon sense, as in the above average type really be what we'd want out of an education?

Let's hear it for intelligent people who would rather work hard to discover the truth and the best answers, even when those may not be popular or simple, even when they may be frightening. We should look up to those who aren't afraid to base their answers on facts rather than opinion and emotion, and who are willing to change their views when more and better information becomes available. Let's hope our country has the good sense to stop seeing bull-headedness as a strength. Let's promote critical thinking, rather than obstinance as a virtue in our elected officials. Does anyone really believe that an entire political platform based on "whatever the other side says, wants, or does, we oppose it regardless of the facts" is in the best interest of anyone other than their own little egos. Really? We're smarter than that, aren't we?

RIGHT!

I'm not a poet. I know that, and will clearly demonstrate it to the world here. But every now and then, I feel the need to dabble in it.

RIGHT!

Charge ahead, fiercely. Bravely.
Blinders firmly in place.
Secure and strong
In the conviction of your rightness.

Charge ahead, boldly. Blindly.
Empowered with knowing
Nothing but your own truth.
Facts and figures only interfere.

Charge ahead, rashly. Powerfully.
Do not question. Do not doubt
Your rightness. Your path.
Answers only confound conviction.

Questioning is for the weak.
Seeking answers, for the uncommited.
Believe! Believe what they say.
It's easier to gain momentum that way.

Charge ahead, forcefully. Certain
That opinion is truth. Better even
Than answers that challenge,
That create the obstacle of doubt.

Charge ahead, blindly. Ignorant.
To anything that stands in the way
Of making life easier, simpler.
Life is hard enough without uncertainty.

Charge ahead, fiercely. Bravely.
Into the dark unknown. Armored
In faith, unreinforced by reality
By science. By answers. By truth.

Questioning is for the weak.
Seeking answers, for the uncommited.
Believe! Believe what they say.
It's easier to gain momentum that way.