Might as well continue where we left off Monday – free associating under the butterfly bush.

Today’s photographic subject are the butterflies feeding on the blossoms. My mind, though, is preoccupied with water. Or, more precisely, with the fact that I try to water as sparingly as I can because of the drought, leaving whole swaths of the yard completely un-watered, but feel guilty even then. Which led to thoughts about sources of water and, I knew I’d get there eventually, dowsing.

Dowsing, the assumed discovery of hidden water sources by specially abled people holding a forked stick, defies, of course, the laws of physics. It is a myth that has never held up to scientific scrutiny. Note, I am willing to get into (not so hidden) hot water, in contrast to Adam Savage from Myth Busters who always declined to test the subject for fear of having to shame millions of people who believe in the myth. Why do I want to go there?

The recent up-tick in reports on and discussions of dowsing, like this NYT article, for example, can be explained by our preoccupation with the horrendous effects of droughts. The reporting is, however, completely irresponsible when it describes perspectives from both sides, believers and critics, as if there was not one valid, scientific truth. “Both sides” being given equal voice, unchallenged, is a huge problem. Below is the summary of the actual data in a nicely detailed historical write-up.

Witching for water

It bugs me to no end. Why do I get so irked when the media provide a platform to both sides of a “so-called dispute?” Let me count the ways: this is about facts, not about political disagreement. If you provide a soap box for people who deny or falsify the facts you potentially allow those misapprehensions to spread. If it is not outspokenly challenged in a reputable, national newspaper (if you are willing to call the NYT that) it signals legitimacy of these claims, however hedgingly you provide short glimpses of the opposing side (the scientists.) And last but not least, in an age and political environment where science denial has become a flag for tribal membership, it supports the wrong conclusion – that hunches and scientific method are on equal footing.

How far spread this both-sidesim for dowsing goes can be found here. It is the general politicization of science, though, which is the bigger problem. A Gallup Poll published 4 days ago found that trust in science has considerably declined, and large partisan gap has emerged, with Republicans becoming much less confident at the same time that Democrats are becoming more so. It is far less correlated with educational levels, and much more with party membership. The step from mistrusting science regarding water witches (who cares) to mistrusting science about climate change or Covid-19 vaccine safety is a small one. One with huge implications, however, as we all know. That’s where we DO care, and are direly dependent on the media to present the factual picture to combat mistaken beliefs. If you have a few minutes, read this Scientific American essay on why there is a war on against science and why the media play such crucial role in it.

In the meantime, I’ll go back to watching butterflies, although they disappear too, just like the truth…

Two Butterflies went out at Noon—

Emily Dickinson – 1830-1886

Two Butterflies went out at Noon—
And waltzed above a Farm—  
Then stepped straight through the Firmament  
And rested on a Beam—  

And then—together bore away 
Upon a shining Sea—  
Though never yet, in any Port—  
Their coming mentioned—be—  

If spoken by the distant Bird— 
If met in Ether Sea
By Frigate, or by Merchantman— 
No notice—was—to me—

And here it is sung…..