• Skip to Content
  • Skip to Sidebar
IU

Indiana University Bloomington Indiana University Bloomington IU Bloomington

Menu

ScIUConversations in Science at Indiana University

  • Home
  • Home
  • About ScIU
  • Write with Us!
  • Contact ScIU
  • The Writers and Editors of ScIU
  • ScIU in the Classroom
  • Annual Science Communication Symposium
  • Search

What are scientific facts?

Posted on August 21, 2018 by ScIU Editorial Team

ScIU Archival Post banner

This post is from ScIU’s archives. It was originally published by Chris ChoGlueck in October 2017 and has been lightly edited to reflect current events.

Whether it’s the “alternative facts” from politicians or the “fake news” from the media, facts are at the fore. While they can’t agree on much else, politicians, pundits, and the public do agree (mostly) about facts: facts are separate from fictions, they are reliable and authoritative, and, most importantly, they have something to do with (good) science. But, what exactly is a scientific fact?

Let’s a take a contemporary example: it is a scientific fact that the earth’s atmosphere has warmed in an unequivocal, unprecedented manner. This is the first conclusion from the most recent assessment report (AR5) from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (for one representation of this fact, see figure 1). You should note that this fact describes a temperature trend around the planet.  It is not an explanation for the trend, such as, that humans are responsible for releasing heat-trapping emissions. (The IPCC AR5 states this as a fact as well, but we’ll start with the basics.)  

This image is a map of the globe (a Mercador projection) with color-coded cells indicating changes in surface temperature from -0.6 to 2.5 degrees Celsius between 1901 and 2012. The vast majority of cells indicate around 0.8 degrees Celsius increase, especially on the continents. The only decrease is just south of Greenland.
Figure 1 is a map of the changes in surface temperature from 1901 to 2012.  It represents the fact that surface warming has been widespread.  Warmer colors denote increases in surface temperature while cooler colors indicate decreases.  The tone of these colors are derived from temperature trends determined by linear regression and calculated only where data availability permitted a robust estimate from mostly complete records (Source: IPCC Assessment Report 5, figure 1.01b, p. 41).

What makes this claim about global warming a scientific fact? To begin, the claim is an empirical one because it involves experience with the world, rather than reasoning with theory and logic. Thus, to evaluate whether the earth has warmed, we would need to go out and look. It would not be enough to sit and think about thermometers or climate patterns. Insofar as these are both experience-based, scientific facts are similar to our everyday facts, like the observation that it’s hot today.

However, not just any old experience from our senses will do. This fact about global warming, for instance, could not simply be observed or confirmed like an everyday fact. What would it even mean to say that someone observed a 0.8⁰C change in surface temperature over the past 150 years? For one, this observation requires extensive and consistent records. It also entails separating the signal of the trend from the noise, often accomplished with modelling and statistics. Otherwise, the trend might actually be picking up some variation other than climate change, such as, changes in the measuring instruments or local conditions. In these ways, scientists’ interactions with the world are more systematic because they involve procedures for planning, recording, and analyzing the data they collect.

As you can see, we’ve started to diverge from the everyday notion of facts as something simply observed by our senses. Scientific facts require additional direction and support from theory and logic, including the mathematics needed for measurement and computation. This systematic endeavor involves a complex system of theory and practice to secure the fact-finding process.

But something is still missing from this story. How can scientists make so many measurements? How will they know if they’ve made errors? Scientists don’t work in isolation but in communities, exchanging and critiquing each other’s findings and ideas. This fact about warming does not come from one set of observations, but from countless collections (some ranging back to 1850) from all over the world. They involve records of receding sea ice, earlier spring blooms, upward migrating tree-lines, changes in soil moisture, and many more.  his variety of observations provides scientists with robust grounds for this fact.

In addition to the many lines of evidence, there are many individuals and groups who have worked together to produce this knowledge. We often credit individuals with foundational achievements and discoveries, such as Joseph Fourier’s theory of the greenhouse effect and Charles David Keeling’s groundbreaking CO2 curves (figure 2). However, these individual merits were founded on a community of scientists, and it was their successors who really showed the validity of their ideas. Thus, bringing together our insights so far, scientific facts are the product of communal, systematic experience with the natural world.

This graph plots CO2 concentration in parts per million (PPM) at the Mauna Loa Observatory over nearly 60 years. The positive trend begins at 310 ppm and gradually increases with a slight upward curve to the current reading of 403.63 ppm on September 11, 2017.
Figure 2 is a “Keeling Curve” of the carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration in Mauna Loa, Hawaii, from 1958 to 2017. It represents the fact that CO2 levels have also increased over the past century. Keeling’s records illustrated both the seasonal cycle of atmospheric carbon and the gradual increase over time from fossil fuel combustion, a now well-evidenced and widely accepted explanation for global warming (Source: Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego).

So the empirical, procedural, and social aspects of science come together to produce factual knowledge. This might leave you wondering: I thought facts were simply given? But, if scientific facts rely not only the natural world but also the work and ideas of humans, are they just our fancies or inventions?

Scientific facts are not simply handed to us by the world “on a silver platter,” independent of our actions, but they are also not arbitrary conventions or constructions. They result from our interaction with the world, and scientists attempt to apply rigorous standards to ensure that they are reliable. Furthermore, controversial facts, such as this claim about global warming, undergo heavy critique from many different angles. The resilience of facts under pressure should give us peace of mind that we can trust them. Stay tuned for my next post, where I’ll talk more about these processes aimed at producing objective, reliable knowledge.

IPCC, 2014. “Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report.” Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp.  Available online.

Edited by Karna Desai and Victoria Kohout

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Related

Filed under: Scientific Methods and TechniquesTagged climate change, climate science, history and philosophy of science, philosophy of science, science education

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Additional Content

Search ScIU

Categories

Tag cloud

#Education #scicomm animal behavior anthropology archaeology astronomy astrophysics Biology biotechnology Black History Month brain cannabinoids cannabis Chemistry climate change conservation coronavirus COVID–19 Diversity in Science diversity in STEM Ecology environment evolution geology history and philosophy of science infectious disease Interdisciplinary Interview Mental Health methods microbiology neuroscience outreach physics Plants primates psychology Research science communication science education Science Outreach science policy Statistics STEM women in STEM

Subscribe

Receive a weekly email with our new content! We will not share or use your information for any other purposes, and you may opt out at any time.

Please, insert a valid email.

Thank you, your email will be added to the mailing list once you click on the link in the confirmation email.

Spam protection has stopped this request. Please contact site owner for help.

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Current Contributors

  • Log in
  • SPLAT
  • ScIU Guides

Indiana University

Copyright © 2022 The Trustees of Indiana University | Privacy Notice | Accessibility Help

  • Home
  • About ScIU
  • Write with Us!
  • Contact ScIU
  • The Writers and Editors of ScIU
  • ScIU in the Classroom
  • Annual Science Communication Symposium
College of Arts + Sciences

Are you a graduate student at IUB? Would you like to write for ScIU? Email sciucomm@iu.edu


Subscribe

Subscribe By Email

Get every new post delivered right to your inbox.

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

 

Loading Comments...