The purpose of “Into the Maelstrom” by Eli Kintisch was one of scientific enlightenment and to argue for the acceptance of the connection of global warming and the weather. The message that I drew from the article however, was much different and probably unintended. I have always hated modern politics and everything that goes with it. In modern politics there is always a bias and one must always take sides. George Washington warned against a two party system because it was so divisive. Alternately, I have always been drawn to science and math because there is almost always a definitive and right answer. This article greatly angered me because it was about science yet it sounded more like politics. Jennifer Francis’ scientific findings and hypothesis should have been about expanding our understanding of our world, but instead it was made out to be a position on which to immediately take sides on. Hoerling discounts Francis’ theory simply because he doesn’t want to believe it while the media immediately accepts the theory because it fuels their agenda. Furthermore, with the endorsement by the President’s science advisor, politics and science formed an even more unpleasant mixture. This unfortunate combination is the result of today’s culture of immediacy. People never simply pause for a minute to take information in. The moment something new is presented, whether that is an idea, art, or even an individual, that thing is immediately judged and often times first impressions are permanent. Ultimately, the message I drew from this article was that science, something that was previously based purely on reasoning has been invaded by today’s media and opinion crazy society. Hopefully, society will eventually correct itself as it often has throughout history and reasoning and a distinction between truth and opinion will return.
Kintisch, Eli. Into the Maelstrom. The Best American Science and Nature Writing. Ed. Tim
Folger and Rebecca Skloot. Boston: Mariner, 2014. 154-62. Print.