Science plays a very important part in our political sphere. The most obvious is the theory of global warming – do we invest trillions to address the problems it predicts? But it plays a part across the spectrum from food safety to medical research to… the list is endless.
The question I asked was please describe the difference between a scientific theory and a scientific fact. That understanding is core to understanding how science works. It's also a very general question that does not require any field specific knowledge. A theory is proven, and generally cannot be a fact (although Josh Penry did a great job of delineating how a theory, can become a fact as we learn what to look for and observe).
So first off, how does this work? You start with a hypothesis which is a guess as to what is going on. You then devise tests to verify the hypothesis. And these tests should include actively trying to disprove the hypothesis. The testing will measure specific observations. Those observations are scientific facts. When your hypothesis is sufficiently tested, then it is considered a scientific theory. This process is what is called the Scientific Method.
Testing a theory in one sense never ends as it is always on trial so to speak and a single new observation, if it is counter to a theory, then disproves the theory. This is why the argument "but it's only a theory" is totally bogus. And it is why proposals like intelligent design are an assertion, not a theory. It presents no set of tests by which to verify the idea. The best example of this I think is the Wallace Line – this is a line that cuts Indonesia in half with very different species on each side of it, the Northwest matching Asia and the Southeast matching Australia. This is a clear fact that we have known for over 100 years. But the why – scientists could not come up with a reasonable explanation – until continental drift was hypothesized. The Wallace Line is one of the primary facts that validated the theory of continental drift.
With all that said, it's not that simple. When does a hypothesis become a theory? How clear are the facts that support a theory? Are people gaming or ignoring some of the data? Is a theory actually just a very good approximation (most Newtonian physics falls in this category). A theory by definition faces no facts that clearly disprove it. But the degree of validating facts varies depending on the theory. All of this is important for our elected officials to understand when they make decisions based on the scientific evidence.
So how did our elected officials do? Better than I expected but worse than I would like to see.
- A Bill Ritter. There was a short pause and then he walked me through from hypothesis to testing to theory and how the facts are used to prove or disprove the theory. He could teach a class. (So of course he's the one leaving elected office!)
- B Bernie Beuscher, Josh Penry, & John Suthers. They all understood the difference between a theory and a fact, but they struggled to put it in to words. As this is not a common question for elected officials, a bit of difficulty is to be expected. But they understood the difference very clearly.
- C Ken Buck, Cary Kennedy, Don Maes, Betsy Markey, Jared Polis, & Andrew Romanoff. All of them have the common misconception that a theory, when validated through experimentation, becomes a fact. Not good.
- D Michael Bennet. When asked he thought for a couple of seconds and then replied "no idea." Kudos for realizing he doesn't know, but on the flip side, when facing the issue of climate change, that should have led him to ask just what level of validity to apply to the theory of global warming (answer – a lot).
- F Mike Coffman, Doug Lamborn, Scott McInnis, Jane Norton, Ed Perlmutter, John Salazar, Mark Udall, & Tom Weins. All declined the request. I first asked three weeks ago for under 2 minutes on the phone to ask 1 question on basic science. I followed up a minimum of two more times.
- Inc. Dianna DeGette & John Hickenlooper. Congresswoman DeGette did call me but I was not able to answer my phone at the time. John Hickenlooper just announced and this was not that important (with the million things that he must be addressing this week) so I didn't even try to get him.
Finally, every politician with grades A – D has guts. I learned that many politicians dislike walking in to a question where they have no idea what it will be. And their press people are even more concerned. Understandable. But every single one of those that answered it did so directly. They all deserve respect for doing so.
