Welcome back to Meteorology Matters.
You know, usually we dive deep into the world of weather, right?
But today, we're gonna shift gears a little bit.
We're gonna look at something that's got the entire
scientific community kind of buzzing and, you know, concerned.
Oh yeah.
And it's something that I think impacts all of us
in a really big way.
Absolutely.
So scientists across the US,
they're trading their lab coats for protest signs.
Yeah.
And it's not just about like a specific research project
or a funding cut or some.
It's something much bigger.
Much bigger.
They believe science itself is under threat.
It's a pretty significant claim when you think about it.
That's right.
We're seeing this really remarkable wave of activism
from scientists and researchers across really all disciplines.
And, you know, that does make you step back and think,
what is going on here?
What is causing this?
So let's break this down.
What has sparked this kind of sudden surge
in scientific activism?
Well, it's interesting you can really trace the roots
of this current movement back to, you know,
a series of policy changes and budget cuts
that really started gaining momentum
during President Trump's second term.
Oh yeah.
And we're talking about, you know,
funding freezes for research that a lot of scientists
consider vital, you know, even grant reviews
that a lot of people see as really targeting
diversity initiatives.
And there have even been mass layoffs of federal scientists.
Wow.
It sounds like a lot of scientists
are feeling like the very foundation of their work
is being undermined.
Oh, absolutely.
And it's not just, you know, theoretical principles
or sort of abstract ideas.
This is having real world consequences for people.
I mean, you just look at some of the major institutions,
the National Institutes of Health,
the National Science Foundation,
even NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration,
they've all experienced significant budget cuts.
And that directly impacts the amount of research
that they can do.
And it trickles down to universities and research
institutions all across the country too.
Right.
Oh, absolutely.
I mean, think about a place like the University of Connecticut,
for example.
A lot of their research programs are heavily reliant
on grants that they get from the National Science Foundation.
And so when that funding dries up,
well, that's going to slow down the pace of discovery.
And ultimately, that affects all of us.
Out of this frustration, right?
This feeling that maybe their voices aren't being heard,
a movement has kind of bubbled up.
It's called stand up for science.
That's right.
It's really interesting because this isn't just
a few disgruntled scientists that are complaining.
This is a really organized effort.
Stand up for science is planning a nationwide protest.
And it's happening on March 7, 2025,
so in just a couple of weeks.
And it's not just one location.
We're talking about rallies that are planned in 32 major cities
across the country.
32 cities.
Yeah.
And it's all going to culminate with this main event
in Washington, DC.
That's a pretty significant mobilization effort.
It sounds like they're really trying
to send a loud and clear message.
Oh, absolutely.
Their goal is to make it crystal clear to the government
that science is vital to our society.
It benefits everyone.
And it needs to be protected.
It needs to be shielded from this kind
of political interference.
You know, it's interesting because scientists, by nature,
they're often trained to be objective, right?
Right.
To focus on data, to focus on evidence.
Absolutely.
But yet here they are.
They're stepping out of their labs.
They're stepping out of the classroom.
And they're stepping into the streets.
They're becoming advocates for their work.
Yeah.
And you know what I think is really compelling about this
is that these aren't just nameless, faceless researchers
that are part of this movement.
These are real people with personal stories
who are putting themselves out there.
Yeah.
And they're leading this movement.
And I think that really humanizes this whole struggle
for science in a way that we haven't seen before.
It does.
And we have people like Colette Della Wallach.
She's a PhD candidate in clinical psychology at Emory
University.
Yeah.
And we have Emma Courtney.
She's a PhD candidate in biology at Cold Spring
Harbor Laboratory.
These are people who are stepping outside
of their comfort zone.
They're becoming the face of this movement.
And like you said, it really does humanize this whole struggle
for science.
Yeah.
And I think it also just highlights the sense of urgency
that a lot of these researchers are feeling.
I mean, this isn't just about some academic disagreement.
They're not just nitpicking about data points.
They see these changes as a real existential threat
to the scientific enterprise itself.
Now, this isn't the first time that we've
seen scientists rally for science.
That's true.
Back in 2017, during Trump's first term,
we saw the March for Science.
Right.
So how does this stand-up for science movement
compare to that earlier effort?
Well, I think there's some interesting distinctions.
While the March for Science was this global event that
drew huge crowds and generated a lot of media buzz,
I think the stand-up for science movement
is a little bit more targeted.
OK.
It seems to be more focused on specific policy changes.
They're not just trying to get attention.
They're actually directly engaging with lawmakers.
They're pushing for specific legislation.
So it's less about raising awareness and more
about actually taking action.
I think that's a good way to put it.
Yeah.
They're not just making noise.
They have a really clear set of demands.
And they seem to have a real strategy in place
for achieving them.
And that brings us to this whole debate
about the politicization of science.
Right.
Is science inherently political?
Yeah.
Or is it something that should be completely separate
from the political arena?
That's a really tough question, because on the one hand,
science is supposed to be objective.
It's supposed to be driven by data and evidence.
That's right.
But on the other hand, we can't ignore the fact
that government funding decisions
play a huge role in shaping the direction
of scientific research.
They do.
Absolutely.
And it's a tricky balance to strike.
It is.
And then even beyond that, there's
this whole question of whether scientists should
engage in political activism at all.
Right.
Some people argue that it compromises their objectivity.
Right.
Or that it alienates segments of the public.
Yeah.
Take, for instance, nature's endorsement of Joe Biden
in the 2020 election.
Oh, right.
Some people argued that that move actually eroded trust
in scientists among Trump supporters.
That's a valid point.
And I think it really highlights the potential risks
that scientists face when they take these kind
of overtly political stances.
So it seems like scientists are facing this real dilemma.
They are.
They feel compelled to speak out against policies
that they see as really harmful to science.
Right.
But at the same time, they're worried
about jeopardizing their credibility and public trust.
Yeah.
No, it's definitely a delicate tightrope walk.
And it's one that's at the heart of this whole stand-up
for science movement.
So let's talk about the specifics here.
Yeah.
What are the concrete goals of stand-up for science?
What exactly are they demanding?
Well, they've actually laid out a pretty comprehensive set
of policy proposals.
And I think, first and foremost, they're
calling for increased funding for scientific research.
Makes sense.
They argue that current funding levels are simply
inadequate to address the pressing challenges
that our society is facing.
You can't expect groundbreaking discoveries
without the resources to actually back them up.
Exactly.
You've got to have the money to do the research.
What else is on there, Jeff?
Well, they're also demanding an end
to what they perceive as censorship and political
interference in research.
They argue that scientists need to have the freedom
to pursue their work without fear of reprisal,
without being afraid of political pressure.
They need to be able to follow the evidence
wherever it leads.
Which is crucial, because if research is being suppressed
or manipulated for political reasons,
that undermines the entire scientific process.
Absolutely.
It really does.
And then finally, they're advocating
for greater diversity, equity, inclusion,
and accessibility in science.
They really believe that science should be open to everyone,
regardless of background or identity,
and that a more diverse scientific community
is ultimately going to lead to richer insights
and more robust discoveries.
That's a message that resonates far
beyond the scientific community, I think.
It does.
It's about ensuring that everyone has the opportunity
to contribute to and benefit from scientific progress.
Yeah, I think that's right.
So they've got their demands.
They've laid them out.
The question is, are those demands going to be heard?
And what role can the public play
in amplifying those voices?
That's a key question.
Because ultimately, this isn't just a fight for scientists.
This affects all of us.
It really does.
Science impacts our lives in countless ways.
Oh, yeah.
I mean, from the technology we use,
to the medicines that we rely on,
to the very air that we breathe.
Absolutely.
So for those of you listening, what can you do
to actually get involved in this movement?
Well, I think there are a number of ways
that people can make a difference.
First, consider attending a local standup for science rally.
Right.
There are events planned all over the country.
So chances are, there's probably one happening here you.
And if you can't make it to a rally,
you can participate in the planned walkout that's
happening at noon on March 7.
It's a symbolic act of solidarity.
But it really does send a powerful message of support.
It does.
And even if you can't physically attend an event,
there are still other ways to contribute.
You could sign petitions.
You can contact your elected officials.
Or you can support scientific organizations
that align with your values.
I think every voice counts in this fight.
It's not just about showing up.
It's about staying informed.
Yeah.
Having conversations with your friends and family.
Absolutely.
About why science matters.
And engaging in thoughtful debate.
Right.
About the role of science in our society.
I think this whole movement has sparked
a really crucial conversation about the relationship
between science politics and public perception.
And it's a conversation that we all need to be a part of.
It is.
And hopefully we've kind of given you
some things to think about.
Yeah.
With this whole situation.
Stand up for science.
And like you said, it's a conversation
that we all need to be having.
And we'll be back next time with part two
of our coverage of this whole situation.
With scientists protesting and marching
and trying to make sure that science is protected
in this country.
I'll see that.
OK.
Sounds good.
This whole situation, it really
makes you think about that delicate balance between science
and politics.
Like they're these two separate worlds.
But they're constantly bumping up against each other.
Yeah.
It's a very complex relationship for sure.
And I think looking back at history
can actually give us some valuable perspective
on how this dynamic has played out over time.
Yeah.
That's a great point.
I mean, we often think of science
as this pure pursuit of knowledge.
But it's never really existed in a vacuum.
It's always been intertwined with the social and political
currents of the time.
Exactly.
I mean, think about Galileo, for example.
His groundbreaking astronomical observations,
they directly challenged the dominant religious views
of the time.
Right.
And then a few centuries later, you have Darwin.
His theory of evolution sparked these really fierce debates.
And they had repercussions far beyond just
the scientific community.
Those are perfect examples.
It seems like whenever scientific discoveries
challenge the status quo, whatever they
force us to reexamine our long held beliefs,
it inevitably triggers a backlash.
Absolutely.
Those impositions of power, those who
benefit from the existing order, they often
feel threatened by new scientific knowledge.
And their first instinct is to try
to discredit the science or to silence the scientists.
That makes sense.
And we're seeing this play out today with climate change,
aren't we?
Oh, absolutely.
I mean, the scientific evidence is overwhelming.
But there are these powerful interests
that are actively trying to sow doubt and downplay the risks.
Precisely.
And it's not just climate change.
We see similar tactics being used
to undermine confidence in vaccines, genetic engineering,
even basic scientific principles like evolution.
It's almost like there's this constant struggle
for control over the narrative.
Yeah.
You know, who gets to decide what's true, what's acceptable,
and what gets funded.
That's a great way to put it.
It's a battle for hearts and minds.
And ultimately, it's a battle over the future direction
of our society.
So in the midst of all of this, where do scientists themselves
stand?
And what role should they play in this battle?
Should they just stay in their labs, focus on the research,
or should they step into the public arena
and become advocates for their work?
Yeah.
That is the million dollar question.
There are valid arguments to be made on both sides.
Right.
You know, on the one hand, scientists
are trained to be objective unbiased.
Their credibility really hinges on their ability
to let the data speak for itself,
to not let their personal opinions cloud their judgment.
I can see that.
Yeah.
But if scientists stay silent, especially when
they see scientific integrity being undermined,
or scientific findings being disordered
for political gain, then who will speak up?
That's a really important point.
And it's a dilemma that a lot of scientists
are grappling with right now.
It's this delicate balancing act,
navigating between the imperative to remain objective
and the responsibility to defend the integrity of science.
It sounds like the stand up for science movement.
They've made the decision that the risks of silence
outweigh the risks of speaking out.
I think that's right.
They're willing to step outside of their comfort zones
to engage in a more public and political way,
even if it means facing criticism or backlash.
It's a bold move.
Yeah.
And they're not alone.
We're seeing similar movements gaining momentum
all around the world.
As scientists grow increasingly concerned
about the erosion of public trust in science
and the spread of misinformation.
Yeah.
It's definitely a global phenomenon.
And I think it reflects a deeper anxiety
about the future of our planet, the stability
of our institutions, and the very foundations of knowledge
itself.
It's like a wake up call reminding us
that science isn't just some abstract pursuit that's
divorced from the real world.
It's inextricably linked to our social, our political,
and our economic systems.
And those systems are facing unprecedented challenges
right now.
We're living in an era of heightened polarization,
widespread distrust of institutions
and this overwhelming deluge of information.
Much of it unreliable.
And that makes it more difficult than ever
to have rational, evidence-based conversations
about complex issues.
So how do we ensure that science can continue
to play its vital role in guiding our decisions,
informing public policy, and shaping the future?
Especially in this challenging environment that we're in.
That's the crucial question we need to be asking ourselves.
And I think it's not simply about providing more funding
for research or training more scientists.
It's about cultivating a societal mindset that
values evidence-based reasoning, critical thinking,
and a willingness to engage with complex, often
uncomfortable truths.
We need to foster a culture that recognizes
that science isn't about being right or wrong all the time.
It's a process of continual exploration,
questioning and revising our understanding of the world
based on new evidence.
And sometimes that means acknowledging that we were wrong,
that our previous assumptions were flawed.
Absolutely.
Embracing uncertainty, being open to new evidence,
and engaging in respectful dialogue.
I mean, those are all essential components
of a healthy scientific mindset.
And that mindset needs to extend beyond the scientific community
itself.
It needs to permeate our media, our education systems,
and our political discourse.
You're absolutely right.
I mean, we need to equip everyone with the tools
to critically evaluate information,
to distinguish between credible evidence and misleading
claims, and to engage in constructive conversations
about complex issues, even when those conversations are
difficult.
That's a tall order.
But it seems essential if we want to navigate the challenges
of the 21st century.
It is essential.
And it all starts with recognizing that science
isn't just for scientists.
It's for all of us.
It's the foundation of our knowledge.
It's the driver of our progress.
And it's the key to solving the most pressing problems
facing humanity.
It's a shared responsibility, isn't it?
To protect the integrity of science,
to ensure that it's used for the benefit of all,
and to create a future where knowledge and reason guide
our decisions.
Absolutely.
It's a responsibility that we all share.
And the choices that we make today
will determine whether science continues
to be a force for good in the world,
or whether it becomes another casualty of our polarized
and fractured times.
We've been talking about this standup for science movement
and this growing tension between science and politics.
And I think it's left us all with a lot to think about.
It certainly has.
And as we wrap up our conversation here,
it feels like the big question that's looming
is what happens next?
These rallies that are planned, they're a powerful statement.
It's a great way to energize the scientific community
and to get the public's attention.
But how do we keep that momentum going?
A spark needs fuel if you want to turn it into a real fire.
That's true.
So where does that fuel come from?
Well, I think it comes from a few sources.
First, there's the unwavering passion
of the scientists themselves.
I mean, there are the ones that are out there on the front lines.
They're doing the research, they're making the discoveries,
and they're seeing firsthand how political decisions can really
impact their work.
And in some cases, actually, hinder progress.
They're the ones who are taking a stand.
They're putting their reputations on the line
and they're pushing for change.
Exactly.
And it's not just about the scientists themselves.
There's this growing realization, I think,
among the general public that science isn't just
this abstract thing.
It's woven into the very fabric of our lives.
From the medications that we rely on,
to the technology that we use every day,
to the food that we eat.
And so as people become more aware of how deeply science
influences their lives, they're more likely to demand
that it be protected and supported.
That makes sense.
What else?
Well, there's also the power of collective action.
And that's really what the stand up for science movement
is all about.
It's about uniting people, amplifying their voices,
and making sure that those voices are heard
by the people in power.
It's about forging alliances, harnessing resources,
and ultimately applying pressure on decision makers
to prioritize policies that benefit society as a whole.
Yeah.
And importantly, it's about recognizing
that science really transcends political boundaries.
I mean, this is not a partisan issue.
This is a human issue.
It affects us all.
It affects all of us, regardless
of our political affiliations.
So if there's one message that we want our listeners
to take away from this episode, it's this.
Get involved.
Find your own way to support science,
whether it's attending a rally or reaching out
to your elected officials, or even just discussing
these issues with your friends and family.
Yeah.
Become a citizen scientist.
Stay informed.
Stay engaged.
And don't hesitate to speak up for what you believe in.
Because science belongs to everyone, not just the scientists,
not just the politicians, not just the academics.
It's a shared endeavor.
And the future of science really depends on all of us
working together to champion its cause
and to protect its integrity.
As always, thanks for joining us on Meteorology Matters.
For more weather insights and to stay updated
on this crucial conversation, make sure to follow meteorologist
Rob Jones.
You can find him on Instagram at meteorologist on TikTok
as TV meteorologist.
And on YouTube, subscribe to Rob Jones' Hurricane,
where you can also find the Meteorology Matters podcast
playlist.
Until next time, stay curious and keep those minds storming.