Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.
Why do so many reasonable people doubt science -National Geographic
Science's worst enemy: Corporate funding
"...for many people who pay close attention to research and development (R&D), the biggest threat to science has been quietly occurring under the radar, even though it may be changing the very foundation of American innovation. The threat is money—specifically, the decline of government support for science and the growing dominance of private spending over American research."
Achenbach, J. (2015). Why do many reasonable people doubt science. National Geographic, 14(5).
"We live in an age when all manner of scientific knowledge—from climate change to vaccinations—faces furious opposition.
Some even have doubts about the moon landing."
Scientific journal: SU prof paid by Chesapeake for pro-fracking study
A leading scientific journal has run a lengthy correction clarifying that a Syracuse University professor and his co-authors were paid by the gas industry on a recent study.
Environmental Science & Technology says that SU prof Donald Siegel was paid by Chesapeake Energy for his work, and at least one of his co-authors worked for Chesapeake during the study period.
Sigel, Methane Concentrations in Water Wells Unrelated to Proximity to Existing Oil and Gas Wells in Northeastern Pennsylvania
Abstract: Recent studies in northeastern Pennsylvania report
higher concentrations of dissolved methane in domestic water wells
associated with proximity to nearby gas-producing wells [Osborn et
al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2011, 108, 8172] and [Jackson et al.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2013, 110, 11250]. We test this
possible association by using Chesapeake Energy’s baseline data set
of over 11,300 dissolved methane analyses from domestic water
wells, densely arrayed in Bradford and nearby counties (Pennsylvania),
and near 661 pre-existing oil and gas wells.
Revkin, A. (2012) A Deeper Look at Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest in ‘Frackademia’ New York Times
"Opponents of expanded gas drilling have coined the term “frackademia” for university research on the potential impacts of the boom in shale gas drilling that involves industry money or experts with industry ties. The effort, of course, is aimed at conveying that industry money or relationships leads to bad science."
What Exxon knew about the Earth's melting Arctic
"Back in 1990, as the debate over climate change was heating up, a dissident shareholder petitioned the board of Exxon, one of the world’s largest oil companies, imploring it to develop a plan to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from its production plants and facilities.
The board’s response: Exxon had studied the science of global warming and concluded it was too murky to warrant action. The company’s “examination of the issue supports the conclusions that the facts today and the projection of future effects are very unclear.”
Go ahead have that 4th cup of coffee
"If you’re one of the millions of Americans that downs coffee or other caffeinated beverages to get through the work day, here’s some good news. A new scientific review on the safety of caffeine says drinking up to four cups of coffee, or about 400 milligrams of caffeine, is pretty safe."
Systematic review of the potential adverse effects of caffeine consumption in healthy adults, pregnant women, adolescents, and children
Wikoff, D., Welsh, B. T., Henderson, R., Brorby, G. P., Britt, J., Myers, E., ... & Tenebein, M. (2017). Systematic review of the potential adverse effects of caffeine consumption in healthy adults, pregnant women, adolescents, and children. Food and Chemical Toxicology.