This article appeared in Nature just a few days ago. While it is well-intentioned and offers advice that can sometimes work, it's not, as the author suggests, a panacea to convince science deniers.Click the image to view (it's free).There are many ways to change the mind of anti-vaxers and creationists. There are many ways to change the minds of creationists, anti-vaxers, people who believe that the Jews plotted 9/11 attacks. Don't think that this is not effective. It is hard to find something more effective than being laughed at and criticized by people you trust (or should). There are also lectures and books on the subject. To counter creationists, that's what I spent most of my career doing. One of them (Hugh Ross) I debated once, but it was obvious that the audience (the Alaska Bar Association), was not in a position to judge the evidence. And debate is often based on rhetoric, rather than truth (viz. the Gish gallop). I will not be debating creationists once again.Lee McIntyre, author of the book, has a different way. It's a more relaxed version of debate. McIntyre just published a book about the topic. Nature is more than happy to help him.Lee McIntyre, a research fellow at Boston University's Center for Philosophy and History of Science, is the author of How to Talk To a Science Denier: Conversations with Flat Earthers, Climate Deniers and Other Who Defy Reason (MIT Press 2021).Perhaps his success is due to the beliefs of his adversaries, those loons who believe that the earth is flat.McIntyre believes that to convince someone who believes the earth is a disk that it's a sphere, you must first gain their trust by respecting them and then ask them the most important questions. He listens to the denialists and then gets to work. Heres how he describes it:How does technique rebuttal actually work in practice? Here's my experience. Flat Earth International Conference 2018, 2018. I was hesitant to speak up on the first day. However, it was difficult to keep my mouth closed when I learned that Antarctica is a barrier of ice that prevents the sea from leaving Earth. I was glad that I waited until the second day. They would say space was fake and scientists were lying if I offered any evidence. We're fed up with pseudoscience and COVID-19. Although I wasn't able to convince flat-earthers, I learned how to get them to pay attention. After they spoke, I followed up with questions. I didn't want to refute arguments. I instead asked them questions. If they agreed with a conspiracy theory, they were asked why they believed the evidence. This allowed me to ask them questions and not just monologue the facts. Science communication is based on the fact that facts alone cannot convince science deniers [JAC: This is something I have seen repeatedly]. Most science deniers don't have a lack of information but lack trust. Trust must be built with patience, respect and empathy, as well as interpersonal connections. Even committed deniers found it interesting to hear what I had.Two ex-Hasidic Jews came up to me at one Amazing Meeting in Las Vegas. They told me they had realized the truth of evolution when they began reading about it as children. They abandoned not only creationism, which many Hasids believed, but also their faith and were eventually rejected by their families. The facts were the key to their success.McIntyre does not tell us, unfortunately, how many or which flat-earthers he influenced. There are many ways to convince science denier that you're wrong. The best way to determine the best method is to test them all and then compare the results after a few months. That's something that nobody has done. Although most methods work for some people, different methods might be needed for others. So McIntyres "one size fits all" approach is not a good idea.It works, as all methods do, he reports.Arnaud Gagneur (a Canadian researcher and physician) conducted over 1,000 interviews of 20 minutes duration in which he listened to parents' concerns and answered questions. The children of those parents were 9 percent more likely to get all the vaccines than the uninterviewed parents whose babies were born in the same maternity unit (T. Lemaitre and al. Hum. Vaccin. Immunother. 15, 732739, 2019 He was told by his mother: This is the first time I have had such a conversation, and I feel respected and I trust you.Sure, it would work (to an extent of 9% success), but what about if they see an ad similar to the one Ill post later today? An ad showing the devastation caused by Covid? I have suggested something similar in the past: showing ads that feature the loved ones and relatives of those who have died from the disease, giving their heartbreaking testimony?What if parents were shown videos of children with whooping cough and tetanus. This might work better. Gagneurs experiment has a problem. The control is not an intervention. It is a different intervention.McIntyres method is something I have used. If you use it with creationists and ask them questions, they won't listen to you because they don't respect you more. McIntyre's suggestion might be able to change the minds of some creationists, but it is time-consuming. I would rather talk about the evidence for evolution and contrast it with creationism's predictions, and then let the chips fall where they might. It might actually be more effective to just attack religion than discuss scientific beliefs and evidence. After all, if religion goes, so does creationism. It is possible to have religion and not be a creationist, but it is impossible to have both religion and creationism.I am always suspicious of people who claim to know the best way for me to convince people about evolution or the effectiveness of vaccination. Remember Chris Mooney's similar advice? Let a thousand strategies bloom with science denialists!If you are so inclined, McIntyres suggestions can be followed. They won't hurt. Sometimes, however, I like to highlight the flaws of faith.This is where you should do it. Basically, anywhere science denier can be found. Get out in front of the pharmacy. Volunteer to speak at the school of your children. If you're ambitious, consider joining me at the flat-earth convention. Already, I have a friend who is a physicist. Learn how you can make a difference for those who are interested. The University of Cincinnati's Center for Public Engagement with Science, Ohio, and the Alan Alda Center for Communication Science in Stony Brook (New York) offer resources. Although it isn't as easy as cheering alongside fellow marchers, it can be just as effective.
