It’s below the surface, so I might just be imagining it (I’ve done that before); but is there a note of frustration in this Eurekalert article?
For one thing, the headline is completely misleading. Where in this, for example, does it say that people are ignoring what they know about science?
“Highly religious audiences are different from less religious audiences. They are looking for different things, bringing different things to the table,” explains Scheufele. “It is not about providing religious audiences with more scientific information. In fact, many of them are already highly informed about stem cell research, so more information makes little difference in terms of influencing public support.”
“Highly religious audiences” bring more to their decision process than scientific information, probably because we know there’s more to the question than science. We do it just the same if we’re highly educated about the science or if we know little about it.
I think some scientists think that if everyone knew what they knew, they would believe what they believe. “More information makes little difference” – – that’s where I sense some frustration. But more information won’t change the fact that this is about embryonic stem cell research. No matter how much might be learned about human disease and health, these are still very young, defenseless, humans being experimented on. They’re not signing informed consent agreements. And we don’t sacrifice our babies to help ourselves.