Rubberduck Reporters Gullible to Science Shamans

Science reporters regurgitate
whatever scientists say about
things they can’t possibly know

O, for one wise science reporter able to tell Big Science that a claim is absurd.

As we pore through press releases and science journals each week, we frequently find outlandish claims that seem hustled for clickbait, like this one from Science, “Dino-killing asteroid came from beyond Jupiter.” A headline writer for the National Exciter could hardly do better. But if a clickbait claim so preposterous was written by a Republican, the media would be all over it like flies on a gummy bear, picking it apart and fact-checking it till even the kookaburra birds would be laughing. Somehow the requirement for epistemic modesty is lost by “science” reporters, who all quack together like rubber ducks, repeating any Big Science claim with embellishments from Roget’s Thesaurus in gleeful attempts to compete for clicks. This proves the Thesaurus is one creature that survived the extinction.

Before groaning at the media response, let us deconvolve Science Magazine’s headline—”Dino-killing asteroid came from beyond Jupiter”—into the multiple issues it raises.  The claim is based on divination of a crystal, ruthenium, found in certain parts of the world. They claim it came from a big asteroid that slammed into earth, creating the Chicxulub crater near the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico.

• How do scientists know that an asteroid killed the dinosaurs? Not all scientists agree (10 Feb 2013, 22 April 2016, 30 Dec 2022).
• How could an asteroid kill only the dinosaurs, and not the frogs and butterflies?
• How do they know that the Chicxulub crater was associated with the dinosaur extinction? Not all scientists agree.
• How do they know when an asteroid hit the Yucatan? This depends on dating assumptions.
• How do they know that only asteroids beyond Jupiter contain ruthenium? No spacecraft has been there to collect samples.
• How do they know that ruthenium in the samples was extraterrestrial? No one saw it being deposited.
• Did they calculate the probability of an asteroid that size hitting Earth, a tiny dot in the inner solar system, coming from beyond Jupiter?

This list could be expanded. One learns in mathematical physics that error accumulates in a series of calculations. Even if scientists could adduce some evidence to support one or a few of these claims, the amount of error in the combined claim “Dino-killing asteroid came from beyond Jupiter” becomes enormous. Is not science supposed to be about observing things? Remember, too, that there is a big difference between repeatable science in the lab and inferences to things that happened in the unobserved past. Nobody saw an asteroid spread ruthenium around the world and kill all the dinosaurs. Nobody has a time machine to go back and test the claim.

Gullible’s Travels

Journalists are supposed to be skeptical of claims made by “experts”. That skepticism is all lost when it comes to science. The Big Science journals and universities recklessly put out claims about the unobservable past. Science reporters should cross their arms, furrow their brows, and ask, “How do you know that?” They should learn enough philosophy of science to be able to poke at claims, look for biases, and detect unwarranted assumptions. Instead, the public is fed dogmatism. We’re going to call out the reporters’ names for public scrutiny.

Dinosaur-killing Chicxulub asteroid formed in Solar System’s outer reaches (Michael Marshall in Nature News, 15 Aug 2024). Did Michael see the asteroid form? Did he witness 66 million years?

Scientists pinpoint dino-killing asteroid’s origin: past Jupiter (Lucie Aubourg in Phys.org, 16 Aug 2024). Beyond Jupiter is no more a “pinpoint” than directions to a friend, “Turn right and go a mile, plus or minus a million miles.” Ridiculous. Lucie knows nothing about asteroids beyond Jupiter by personal observation. Neither do the scientists.

Tracking down the asteroid that sealed the fate of the dinosaurs (Science Daily, 16 Aug 2024). Like other science news amalgamators, Seance Dilly (puns intended) regurgitates the press release by Jan Voelkel from the University of Cologne uncritically. The reporter pronounces a verdict on a case without hearing any cross-examination from skeptics.

Dinosaur-killing asteroid was a rare rock from beyond Jupiter, new study reveals (Sharmila Kuthunur at Live Science, 16 Aug 2024). Sharmila beat the other barf bags by a day. Congratulations. She even got her own barf regurgitated on Space.com on August 19.

Ruthenium isotopes show the Chicxulub impactor was a carbonaceous-type asteroid (Fischer-Gödde et al., Science, 15 Aug 2024). Here’s the journal paper by 15 fortune-telling scientists. They know not to be too audacious, so they couch their claim in phrases that give them an out: the crystals are “more consistent with” outer solar system asteroids. They use this phrase a dozen times in the short paper. They include “uncertainties” in the data in fancy graphs, but never calculate the total error for the composite claim that all the dinosaurs died from an asteroid that came to earth beyond Jupiter. Since the theory of dinosaur extinction by an asteroid is a house of cards, they are only adding an attic to it with new cards.

One might think that peer review for this journal paper gives science reporters cover for trusting the claim without analyzing it critically. One would be in error for so thinking (19 Oct 2022, 9 July 2016, 2 June 2014). Critical thinking should always be a hallmark of a journalist.

This is NOT a photograph! The Chicxulub site has inspired many renditions. That doesn’t make them accurate depictions of real history. Artwork (not science) courtesy of Detlev van Ravenswaay/ScienceSource. Exercise: find the problems in this depiction, like, where are the fires and smoke and dust?

Another Example: Climate Gullibility

In these “science” headlines, claims are made not just about the past, but about the future! Note to reporters: you and the scientists will likely be dead before the claims can be tested, a clever way to escape accountability. Some articles refer to observations, but the reporters fail to remember that association is not causation.

Will climate change lead to the extinction of a newly discovered tarantula species? (Phys.org, 19 Aug 2024). Let’s get this straight. Taratulas survived the asteroid, but can’t survive a little more heat than usual?

Climate change may allow the Earth’s oldest, tiniest creatures to dominate — and that’s seriously bad news (Ryan Heneghan at Live Science, 16 Aug 2024). A reporter trusts computer models again (24 July 2024), making his readers worry over computer games. What “could” happen is not science. A monster could appear under his bed when he is 62. Until either of these things does happen and is recorded by a reliable witness, he is doing fortune-telling, not journalism. Ryan, learn to ask hard questions of scientists!

Tropical beetles more sensitive to impacts are less likely to be known to science (Current Biology, 19 Aug 2024). If they don’t “know” about tropical beetles that are not known to science, how can they say that they would be more sensitive to impacts like climate change? Michael J.W. Boyle and his nine other worry-warriors try to make readers feel guilty that we are forcing beetles into extinction without even knowing their names.

Environmental pressures including habitat loss and climate change can drive changes in tropical assemblages of insects. This has led to some claims of a tropical ‘insect apocalypse’, consensus for which remains elusive owing to a lack of data.

So how about waiting to get some data before making the claim? Don’t Boyle and buddies remember that consensus is not science, and science is not consensus? (19 Aug 2022).

Evolution might stop humans from solving climate change (Science Daily, 2 Jan 2024). OK, let’s play their “might makes right” game. Evolution might make climate activists commit mass suicide, like proverbial lemmings. Evolution might make scientists better able to discern that climate change is a globalist hoax. Evolution might make reporters smart enough to think critically. Evolution might make us all die from leftist politics. See our 27 July 2019 article.

Lemmings, by JB Greene. Used by permission.