A few years ago, at a chemical conference, one of the keynote speakers put up a particularly telling cartoon.
It had two panels. In the left one, under the tag "The Scientific Method," an elderly scientist says to a young student: "Here are the facts. Which conclusion can we draw?"
In the right hand panel, under the tag "The Political Method" an elderly politician says to a young staffer: "Here is the conclusion. Which facts do we find to support it?"
Science and politics do not always mix. Indeed, many scientists feel that politicians simply do not understand science. And I suspect that many politicians feel that scientists do not understand politics.
Yet many of the world's problems can only be answered with science - but science appears to have a public relations problem.
Convincing politicians of the validity of science is critical. The problems we face will not go away by themselves. However, it is not just politicians that science has to convince.
A recent survey in the United States revealed one third of the public do not think climate change is a real problem. Almost half of the public say they mistrust genetically modified food despite the fact that over 70 per cent of the food they consume has been genetically modified or contains genetically modified ingredients. And the rise in unvaccinated communities has seen measles rates triple in the last few years.
Mistrust of scientists goes much deeper in the United States. In a 2011 poll, almost 70 per cent of Americans said they think that scientist have falsified data to support their own opinions. To put it simply, they believe scientists are outright lying.
In Canada, the numbers are similar. Scientists were once one of the most trusted professions and while Canadians don't seem to think that they lie outright, scientists are not at the top of the "who do you trust?" pile anymore.
"What happened?" is the question that many scientists and organizations are asking.
It would appear to be tied to the rise of a conservative agenda south of the border. Polls of both self-identified conservatives and political moderates demonstrate a significant decrease in their trust in science.
It could be that scientific views clash with ideological beliefs. It could be that scientists are becoming political active around such as issues as acid rain, climate change and the appearance of ozone holes. It could be that science is increasing seen as too hard and too boring in schools.
Or it truly could be tied to a conservative agenda.
Science has brought us much of our modern world. From computers and smart phones to cleaner burning cars and pharmaceuticals, our world is shaped by technological advances driven by scientific discoveries.
But at the same time as science has advanced the world, scientists have also been exploring the effects of technological advances on the environment.
Consider DDT. It was a miracle compound when it was introduced. It prevented one million deaths per year in the 1940s and 50s but by 1960, scientists were beginning to see the downside of the compound. Eggs with thin shells meant the American bald eagle was almost wiped out south of the border.
No one wanted to hear that DDT, the miracle compound, was to blame.
Indeed, for the past 40 years, science has undone one thing after another. Everything from cigarettes to hairspray to leaded gasoline has fallen as a result of further investigation.
It is in this context that we now find a Conservative government under Prime Minister Stephen Harper not wanting to listen to the results of science. The federal government has been muzzling its scientists for the past decade.
No one really wants to know about the health and safety risks of pipelines, fracking or biofuels. No one is really interested in finding out that the burgeoning fish farming industry could be harming the surrounding environment and decimating native stocks.
It is a case of "don't ask; don't tell" but the target in this case is scientific information.
Probably the biggest denial by our present government is around climate change. Conservative politicians still want to deny it is happening. They contend the scientists have it all wrong.
This has led us to the embarrassing circumstances where UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon in an interview with CBC's Peter Mansbridge said Canada needs to stop stalling on settling climate change goals, and instead become "ambitious and visionary".
"It's only natural that Canada as one of the G7 countries should take a leadership role" he said. "There are ways to make a transformative change from a fossil fuel-based economy to a climate-resilient economy by investing wisely in renewable energy choices."
Maybe if Harper is not interested in scientific conclusions, he will be more willing to listen to the words of a fellow politician.
