Why Facts Don't Change Our Minds

No. They are accepted as a scientific theory [1].

A scientific fact is "a repeatable careful observation or measurement (by experimentation or other means), also called empirical evidence" [2].

The media and general public doesn't really understand the distinction, and tends to call widely-accept scientific theories "facts" and treat them as if they are proven true -- when in the reality is the best science can do is just not yet prove something false.

Unfortunately, there are also a ton of perverse incentives such as when the sugar industry pays to fund science that 'proves' fat is the cause of problems[3], not sugar.

This doesn't mean science can't be trusted. Even flawed scientific theories can still be useful: for example, school children learn how to do basic quantum physics using the Bohr-Rutherford model before learning that model is actually disproven, because the model is still adequate to explain what's necessary at that level of education.

You have to judge the source of the study, who funded it (and why), and if it has been reproduced enough to be widely accepted -- especially in cases where there are contradictory results or theories.

It turns out Science, like many things, is hard.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact#In_science

[3] http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/13/493739074/...

To give another example, we all know that males dominate university, especially STEM, right? It will actually surprise you to know that within 15 years, the number of females are expected to dominate the number of males at university by 91% (yes, 91%). Imagine Ars Technica's spin on that extreme imbalance!!!

Let me quote one of many sources that are actually looking rather than just taking Ars Technica and The Verge at face value,

QUOTE

UCAS chief Mary Curnock Cook warned that despite clear evidence of a growing gender gap, there has been “deafening policy silence” on the issue.

She said: “Girls are doing better throughout primary, secondary and higher education than boys; poor, white boys are the most disadvantaged group in entry to higher education and the gap is getting bigger.

“But despite the clear evidence and despite the press coverage, there is a deafening policy silence on the issue.

“Has the women’s movement now become so normalised that we cannot conceive of needing to take positive action to secure equal education outcomes for boys?”

UNQUOTE

At the BBC, feminists did not dismiss the figures trending towards 91% dominance, but they put it down to boys being "slow learners" and "not willing to work as hard". And what changed from 30 years ago when the results WERE balanced between genders?

Anecdotally, I said to a friend of mine the other day that the western world is on a rapid downhill slide. When he asked why, I said that any society that is at war with itself (male vs female was the focus), you will see that society crumble. The bullying is so extreme and there is no outrage. Education and protection from violence are fundamental human rights!

Despite what the New Yorker said, we need outrage!

I'd like to sincerely thank UCAS chief Mary Curnock Cook for being one of the few women brave enough to speak out about extreme prejudice.

[1]Monty must always open a non-winning door based on his insider knowledge and always give you the chance to switch, and of course the prize has to always remain behind its original door.