Ebook Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science
After few time, lastly the book that we and you await is coming. So alleviated to get this terrific book available to offer in this site. This is guide, the DDD. If you still really feel so tough to get the published publication in guide store, you could accompany us once again. If you have actually ever obtained guide in soft file from this publication, you could quickly get it as the reference now.
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science
Ebook Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science
Not A Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, And Utterly Mangle Science. Happy reading! This is what we really want to state to you that enjoy reading so much. Just what about you that assert that reading are only commitment? Never mind, checking out behavior should be started from some certain factors. Among them is reading by commitment. As what we want to provide below, the book entitled Not A Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, And Utterly Mangle Science is not kind of obligated book. You could appreciate this publication Not A Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, And Utterly Mangle Science to check out.
When Not A Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, And Utterly Mangle Science is offered you, it's clear that this publication is really suitable for you. The soft documents principle of this also brings convenience of how you will appreciate the book. Certainly, delighting in guide can be just done by reading. Reading guides will certainly lead you to always understand every word to create as well as every sentence to utter. Lots of people occasionally will certainly have various methods to utter their words. Nevertheless, from the title of this book, we make sure that you have actually recognized exactly what get out of the book.
The factors that make you need to read it is the related topic to the problem that you truly want today. When it's mosting likely to make better possibility of analysis products, it can be the means you have to take in similarly. Yeah, the manner ins which you could take pleasure in the time by checking out Not A Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, And Utterly Mangle Science, the moment that you can make use of to do excellent task, and also the time for you to gain what this publication offers to you.
Something different, that's something elegant to read this sort of representative publication. After obtaining such book, you could not should consider the method your participant concerning your troubles. Yet, it will offer you realities that could influence just how you look something and think of it effectively. After reading this book from soft file provided in web link, you will certainly understand how precisely this Not A Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, And Utterly Mangle Science steps forward for you. This is your time to pick your book; this is your time to find to your requirement.
Review
“This deliciously mordant critique [is] a key handbook for an era of “alternative facts†and pressures on research.†- Barbara Kiser, Nature“Levitan’s anecdotes range from the ridiculous to the terrifying . . . If it were up to me, it would be required reading for all congressional staffers working on issues related to science, engineering, and technology.†- Sheril Kirshenbaum, Science“A clever, timely guide to the sneaky ways sleazy politicians bamboozle us on climate change and other scientific issues. Ernest Hemingway said every good writer needs a built-in, shockproof BS detector, and now thanks to Dave Levitan we can all have one.†- Dan Fagin, author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning Toms River“Read Dave Levitan’s bare-knuckled book for insight into the manipulations and distortions by anti-science politicians who have chosen to act as advocates for vested corporate interests rather than the people they’re supposed to represent.†- Michael Mann, Distinguished Professor, Penn State University, and co-author of The Madhouse Effect“With this compelling and enjoyable book, Dave Levitan may have put the "I'm not a scientist" line out to pasture for good. While I expect politicians may not read it, the public should! Science issues will be at the heart of every important decision our new President makes.†- Lawrence M. Krauss, theoretical physicist and author of The Greatest Story Ever Told . . . So Far“Levitan's level-headed examination of these rhetorical gymnastics is a vital antidote to and warning against a dangerous, regressive future. A no-holds barred takedown of political idiocy and the terrifying reality of science denial.†- Kirkus Reviews
Read more
About the Author
Dave Levitan is a journalist whose work has appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer, Scientific American, Slate, and many other outlets. He lives near Philadelphia with his wife.
Read more
Product details
Paperback: 272 pages
Publisher: W. W. Norton & Company; 1 edition (April 18, 2017)
Language: English
ISBN-10: 039335332X
ISBN-13: 978-0393353327
Product Dimensions:
5.6 x 0.7 x 8.3 inches
Shipping Weight: 4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
Average Customer Review:
3.7 out of 5 stars
54 customer reviews
Amazon Best Sellers Rank:
#263,661 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
I was looking forward to reading this book. I was hoping to see some honest, unbiased writing that exposed misrepresentation of science by our politicians. What I didn't expect was to see the writer engage in several of the fallacies he accuses the (if we're honest here) Republican politicians of. I specify Republicans because the writer uses approximately three examples of Democrat fallacies, and then excuses them as being not really that bad. I'm not Republican or Democrat, and I'm already sick of seeing the two camps bash each other at the expense of objectivity. To see a science writer bash one side to advance his own ideological views while pretending to speak in the name of science is inexcusable.He starts with an introduction bashing Trump because the book was written before he was elected and he hadn't put any of Trump's statements in the book because he hadn't expected him to win. At first, I figured it was just to give the book some completeness, although I was curious why he didn't just make it an appendix. Before I'd completed a quarter of the book, he'd made his politics crystal clear, so I then understood why he made sure to include the Trump-bashing introduction.Every chapter includes references to global warming, which the writer feels strongly about. I'm fine with that, but if he wanted to write a global warming book, call it that, don't mislabel it. But he cherry picks his data and arguments, as well as which politicians he wishes to bash. He demonizes his targets by using incendiary language (such as calling one of the GOP politicians an "anti-abortion activist"). His biased characterization of each politician he has an ax to grind with makes his own politics clear, completely separate from scientific fact. He goes on for an entire chapter arguing about how a true scientist can't state with certainty the exact week of pregnancy when a fetus can feel pain, as if the ability to feel pain is the threshold that makes an abortion ethical or not. Later in the book, he makes the glib statement "science is science" regardless of what the politicians want to mislead people into thinking, as if he had not earlier completely overlooked that it's easily verifiable that a fetus is alive. If the ability to feel pain is the point that makes an abortion unethical, then what's to stop me from anesthetizing my neighbor and putting them down? He sacrifices scientific certainty to advance his political views. There were several other fallacies, scattered throughout this short but disappointing book, and I'm not here to regurgitate it.If you're a liberal person who is looking for something that seems to back up your beliefs without giving anything really scientific to support it, you probably will find use in this book. It will also make you feel good reading about all the Republicans he bashes on the way. If you're a conservative, you'll dislike it. If you're more of a centrist, like me, and just looking for something unbiased, you'll probably dislike it as I do. I consider it a waste of time.
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science by Dave Levitan“Not a Scientist†is an entertaining expose of deception used by politicians to undermine science that goes against their agenda. Journalist and author, Dave Levitan takes the readers on a journey of underhanded politicians who misrepresent science for personal gain. The author explores a variety of devious tactics and helps the reader identify them. This enjoyable 267-page book includes the following twelve chapters: 1. The Oversimplification, 2. The Cherry-Pick, 3. The Butter-Up and Undercut, 4. The Demonizer, 5. The Blame the Blogger, 6. The Ridicule and Dismiss, 7. The Literal Nitpick, 8. The Credit Snatch, 9. The Certain Uncertainty, 10. The Blind Eye to Follow-Up, 11. The Lost In Translation, and 12. The Straight-Up Fabrication.Positives:1. A well written and well researched book.2. A timely topic, how politicians misrepresent science.3. Levitan’s style is very accessible, straight-forward and is not afraid to let loose from time to time.4. Levitan doesn’t waste stating the main purpose of the book. “The “not a scientist†line is a way out of talking about actual science, but politicians don’t always have such an exit strategy when scientific topics arise. And as those examples illustrate, even when they do try to dodge the question, they end up spewing misinformation and errors virtually at every step. This book is about what happens when our elected officials talk science, and fail.â€5. The book does a very good job of describing a number of mistakes and misrepresentations. “The Oversimplification - They take a complicated scientific issue and strip it down to a sound bite, a pithy turn of phrase that might garner cheers during a speech or build support for a piece of legislation, but would also give anyone listening an incorrect impression of the science in question.â€6. A good list of hot button topics misrepresented. “With regard to fetal pain, the claim regarding 20 weeks is part of the ongoing effort by Republicans to limit and restrict abortions.â€7. Good use of charts and diagrams to complement the narrative.8. Helps readers identify bad science on the part of politicians. “When a politician cites a singular example as a means of refuting a larger trend, take note; this is the hallmark of bad science.â€9. Many examples of politicians by name misrepresenting science. “NASA was created by the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958. This legislation was part of a hasty attempt to respond to the Soviet launch of Sputnik, the world’s first orbiting satellite, in October 1957. The founding document actually manages to refute Cruz in the very first objective listed: “The expansion of human knowledge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space.â€10. Provides the best of our current scientific knowledge. “To be extremely, urgently clear: that conclusion was false. Vaccines. Do. Not. Cause. Autism.â€11. The use of bad information to support claims. “This is the BLAME THE BLOGGER—when a politician repeats information from often terrifically dubious sources, with the knowledge that many people simply won’t know how to check the underlying science. It’s online, so it must be true!â€12. The use of ill-founded ridicule. “Here’s how Huckabee put it at an event in Iowa, in January, a few months before he declared his candidacy for the presidency: When [Obama] said: “The greatest threat this nation faces . . . is climate change.†Not to diminish anything about the climate at all, but Mr. President, I believe that most of us would think that a beheading is a far greater threat to an American than a sunburn!†“The Pentagon released a “Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap†in October 2014,4 calling global warming a “threat multiplier.â€â€13. The issue of fracking is presented. “In spite of these sorts of obstacles, it is now beyond dispute that there have, in fact, been cases of water contamination as a result of fracking and related oil and gas development activities.â€14. A politician favorite, taking credit for some sort of accomplishment just because it happened on their watch. “Christie suggested that removing his state from the RGGI (pronounced “Reggieâ€), which is indeed a regional cap-and-trade program aimed at lowering carbon emissions, somehow resulted in the solar power boom. Essentially, he took one decisive action—pulling out of RGGI—and claimed it as the reason for this clear example of progress. This is about as drastic and audacious a CREDIT SNATCH as one can imagine.â€15. Global warming is one the headliners of this book. “The assessments of global warming, including the fact that we have already raised Earth’s temperature by about 1°C and that we’re on track for a whole lot more in the coming years and decades, are based on very solid science. The fact that humans have caused virtually all of that warming is also a rock-solid conclusion.â€16. A look at vaccines. “The science was clear back then, and it has only become clearer since: all young people, both boys and girls, should receive the HPV vaccine before becoming sexually active, according to the CDC.â€17. A fascinating look at Genetically Modified foods (GM). “GM foods currently available on the international market have passed safety assessments and are not likely to present risks for human health. In addition, no effects on human health have been shown as a result of the consumption of such foods by the general population in the countries where they have been approved.â€18. Senator Paul’s ludicrous story about Robert Lucas and a new EPA rule. “Paul claimed that this old man was sent to prison for literally putting dirt on his own land. Here’s how the EPA described it: “The most significant criminal wetlands case in the history of the Clean Water Act.â€11 What gives?â€19. Ben Carson bites the dust. “In an interview in early 2015, as Dr. Ben Carson was gearing up for his presidential run, he disputed the idea that the progress toward marriage equality mirrored the civil rights battles of the mid-twentieth century. The difference, he said, lay in the fact that people have no control over their race, but they can, in fact, choose whether or not to be gay.†“There is a general consensus that the vast majority of us do not experience our sexual orientation as a choice.â€20. Reagan’s mishandling of AIDS and the impact. “In Reagan’s case, critics say his silence on AIDS (HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, was not named until May 1986) greatly hindered research into its causes, potential treatments, and prevention efforts.â€Negatives:1. A bit on the short side, I wanted more.2. Right wingers will not like the partisan-siding book.3. Notes included but no separate formal bibliography.In summary, an entertaining an informative book. Levitan does a good job of highlighting the different techniques politicians use to obfuscate or deceive the public in order to protect their agenda. Conservatives may have a valid argument that the book is one sided but the truth is Republicans tend to be more often than not on the wrong side of science. It’s a worthwhile read, I recommend it!Further recommendations: “Merchants of Doubt†by Naomi Oreskes & Erik M. Conway, “The War on Science†by Shawn Lawrence Otto, “The Truth to Power†by Al Gore, “The Weather of the New Future†by Heidi Cullen, “The Panic Virus†by Seth Mnookin, “Lies Incorporated†by Ari Rabin-Havt, “The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars†by Michael E. Mann, “Lies, Damned Lies, and Science†by Sherry Seethaler, “The Hockey Stick and Climate Wars†by Michael E. Mann, “Reality Check†by Donald R. Prothero, and “This Changes Everything†by Naomi Klein.
Politicians, as a lot, tend to make a lot of misleading statements about a lot of subjects…in fact, they will usually try to tell their given audience what they want to hear. While what they say is not always a complete and total lie, it usually has an element of bull manure in it, particularly when they discuss science.The author goes through the litany of ways they can deceive an audience….the "I'm not a scientist, but", the "blame the blogger" and a number of other methods used. All are various ways of deceiving you into thinking something other than the truth…in fact a number of the methods employed give the politician plausible denial. As in "I read it on a web site, so it must be true."The book is well written, snarky, sometimes humorous and very informative. It will allow you to know when to put your bull manure detection on full alert and how to find the truth when you don't hear it. This is a quick read, but important for anyone who cares about holding politicians feet to the fire about what they say, and how they say it. Highly recommended!
Gosh, this is short. If you’re unfamiliar with logical fallacies it's good. It has some specific counters to common politicians’ claims. If you're thinking of buying the book, you probably don't need to.
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science PDF
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science EPub
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science Doc
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science iBooks
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science rtf
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science Mobipocket
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science Kindle
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science PDF
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science PDF
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science PDF
Not a Scientist: How Politicians Mistake, Misrepresent, and Utterly Mangle Science PDF
