Chapter 11: THE TRUTH COMES FROM DATA AND INSIGHT

As we have discussed, humanity has benefited almost immeasurably from its adoption of the scientific method. Today, more people on the planet live longer, healthier, more productive lives because of the scientific advancements that have been made. The scientific method has created MRI machines, vaccines, the Internet and mobile devices, planes, cars, solar and nuclear power, microwave ovens and air conditioning. It has banished longtime scourges of human existence such as smallpox and tuberculosis and serious bacterial infections. 

The success rate of the scientific process is unparalleled. It has helped to improve the environment. Take the ozone layer. Ozone is a chemical in the atmosphere that blocks harmful UV-B rays from hitting the earth. These rays can cause serious medical problems such as cancer, cataracts, and genetic damage.

According to the NASA website:

Antarctic ozone slowly decreased in the 1970s, with large seasonal ozone deficits appearing in the early 1980s. Researchers at the British Antarctic Survey discovered the ozone hole in 1985, and NASA’s satellite estimates of total column ozone from the Total Ozone Mapping Spectrometer confirmed the 1985 event, revealing the ozone hole’s continental scale. 

Scientific experiments showed that a certain class of manmade chemicals called chlorofluorocarbons were responsible for the Ozone Hole. According to the The Chapman & Hall Encyclopedia of Environmental Science, “Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are nontoxic, nonflammable chemicals containing atoms of carbon, chlorine, and fluorine. They are used in the manufacture of aerosol sprays, blowing agents for foams and packing materials, as solvents, and as refrigerants.”

Measurements of the ozone hole in the 1980s showed that it was expanding. In 1987, 27 nations signed a global environmental treaty, the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. This agreement worked to reduce the consumption and production of ozone-depleting compounds with the goal of healing the ozone hole. The agreement has reduced the levels of CFC in the atmosphere but did not totally eliminate it. According to NASA,”atmospheric levels of man-made ozone depleting substances increased up to the year 2000. Since then, they have slowly declined but remain high enough to produce significant ozone loss. The ozone hole over Antarctica is expected to gradually become less severe as chlorofluorocarbons— banned chlorine-containing synthetic compounds that were once frequently used as coolants—continue to decline. Scientists expect the Antarctic ozone to recover back to the 1980 level around 2070.”

The science on ozone depletion was clear or as clear as it could be at the time according to the scientific method. The danger was also clear. According to our best scientific analysis and data, if the ozone hole continued to expand, cases of cancer, cataracts, and other genetic damage would be expected to increase. The solution was also clear: eliminate the use of CFCs. Find substitutes, as society has managed to do. This truth was enough to catalyze groups into action. 

And because we have acted on a global basis, the ozone problem is getting better. Humanity used its knowledge to resolve the problem.

That brings us to global warming or climate change. This has become a highly politicized and polarizing issue. On one side are the bulk of the world’s scientists who believe, based on experimental data, that carbon dioxide and other heat trapping gasses are going to increase the temperature of the planet. According to NASA:

“Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.”

There are some scientists who do not agree that human activity is responsible for climate change or who are uncertain about it. They believe that the cost of action is not warranted, due to this uncertainty.

There have been moments in science where a lone scientist went against the prevailing wisdom and was eventually proven right. The most recent case is the creation of rNA based vaccines. Katalin Karikó, a Hungarian scientist came up with the idea of harnessing mRNA to fight disease. Yet, despite her  compelling theory, she spent the 1990s collecting rejection letters as governments, corporations, and her own colleagues found the idea too far-fetched to deserve support and funding. In 1995, with still no success, she was demoted at the University of Pennsylvania (As we discussed in our previous chapter, she sacrificed her life and career to her cause and was eventually proven correct). But still she endured. In 2005, she and her collaborator Drew Weissman discovered a method for successfully using mRNA. Yet, even with the publication of their paper, most in the scientific community ignored their discovery. Finally, after years of rejection, their discovery formed the basis for the creation of the drug companies Moderna and BioNTech, both critical to the development of a COVID vaccine. 

So, the scientific community doesn’t always get it right. New theories are usually looked upon skeptically until they can be proven. It may take time and fortitude to do it, but eventually, if a theory represents new knowledge, the scientific community will be convinced. Nature doesn’t lie.

Climate change is different. The connection between man-made activities and a rise in the earth’s temperature has already passed thorough scientific skepticism and the bulk of the scientific community now embraces it. Only a few skeptics continue to remain unconvinced. That is their prerogative. But unless they can present evidence that calls into question the findings of 97% of the world’s scientists, their views cannot be considered anything other than fringe. 

The Covid Vaccine

This also holds true for the Covid vaccine. As we all know, Covid is a global pandemic that has killed millions of people, shut down economies, and brought economic and mental misery to tens of millions of people. It is a fast-moving medical situation with rapidly evolving information. Scientists, even as I write this, do not understand everything about the virus and its many variants. That’s not unusual. Even today, scientists have been unable to vanquish the flu or AIDS. Nature is tricky and science is often unable to penetrate all of its mysteries. To call scientists who change their minds in the face of new evidence “quacks” or “incompetent” is to misunderstand science. Part of the scientific process is putting forth a hypothesis, testing it to see if it has validity, and then determining whether it stands up to the testing. Some ideas do, others do not. 

The vaccine was created by the same science that eradicated polio, vanquished smallpox, and gives AIDS patients a manageable disease. There is nothing wrong with questioning a new treatment or being scared of it. But casting aspersions without any evidence is not part of the scientific method. The vaccine was tested in tens of thousands of test patients, evaluated, and then rolled out to millions of subjects. To date, the rate of side effects has been as low as the scientists projected.

If someone wants to challenge the safety or effectiveness of the vaccine, then they must come with facts and data. Simply saying that “it’s bad” or that “my friend’s friend said she had a bad reaction” is not enough and is not scientific. 

If an idea passes through the scientific method, evidence is presented, and the vast majority of scientists agree on the conclusion, it should be accepted as the prevailing wisdom until another idea can knock it off its perch. Not accepting it is to not accept the process that brought us the discoveries we currently benefit from today. Following your hunch, or listening to your neighbor is just a step away from the superstition filled world that existed before the Enlightenment and that kept humans mired in poverty, misery, and disease. A world that just a few hundred years ago burned witches at the stake. Is that the world that we want to return to?

The truth is often difficult to believe. Sometimes, it flies in the face of our beliefs or what we want to believe.  But stripped down to its basics, the truth is just like a scientific discovery. It has been tested and confirmed. It can be verified, and ideally, the experiment that leads to the truth can be repeated and yield the same results. 

Why is the truth important? Why do we care so much? Because decisions based on lies are decisions built on sand. They have nothing in nature to anchor them and in the end wind up causing more pain and suffering. Think about the lies you tell in your life. Not the personal lies. Not fibbing to your spouse about how that shirt looks or whether their latest hair style is flattering. Sure, even lying about this can have negative consequences. But let’s pick something more consequential. Suppose you lie to your spouse about your finances. You tell your husband or wife that there is more money in the bank than actually exists.  As a result, you both spend more than you should, drawing down whatever meager savings you have even more and putting yourself even further behind financially. Lying might cover the reality for some time, but eventually the truth of the situation will catch up to you. This lack of truth can often be done for some period of time. And in this period, the liar may look prescient or smart, but eventually the tide will go out and the lie will be exposed. 

And lies and the lack of truth corrode trust. Will the spouses ever trust each other again? Probably not without a lot of difficulty and expensive therapy. Trust is based on someone demonstrating over time that what they say is the truth. If public officials are lying or obscuring the truth, this destroys the compact between the people and their government. It is in this soil that conspiracy theories take root. Many Middle Eastern populations are rife with conspiracy theories because the people no longer believe in or trust their governments. How can knowledge be unearthed if no one believes each other? If truth and fiction become interchangeable then how do we even decide what is working and what is not? The very foundation of knowledge discovery is based on the desire to uncover the truth and trusting that those who are supposed to verify this information are faithfully executing their role.

Ascendance is not strict and absolutist. It is not Puritanical ideology.  People will lie and obscure the truth. And some lies, white lies, may even be warranted, even in the public sphere. But in general, the truth is almost always the best approach. One way to think about it is that the necessity to tell the truth increases as the number of people impacted rises and as the seriousness of the lie increases. Thus, a lie about what someone ate for dinner, told to one person, is not something which significantly impacts knowledge generation. But a President lying about a policy matter that impacts the entire nation or the world is another story. 

Still, if we are to uncover knowledge in all spheres of our life, it must be done by adhering to the truth as much as possible. 

Ascendants strive to find the truth and use it to make decisions. The allegiance to seeking this truth is more important than furthering an agenda or scoring political points because the truth ultimately helps with knowledge creation and moves humanity towards its long-term goals.