Is Science Debatable?

Growing up, I was more than a pretty good student -- except when it came to science and math. My father, an engineer, used to wonder why that was, and tell me the great thing about science and math was that there was only one answer -- you knew if you were right or wrong for the most part.
When I went to work for the PA Department of Environmental Protection as an adult, I learned that I should have paid more attention. But I also learned, through my interaction with a voluminous number of citizens, that there were more people like me when it came to math and science -- and government, too, but thats another posting.
Looking at the news of late, I'm beginning to wonder why so many people think the various laws of science, physics, chemistry and the natural world are open for debate.
Just today, I was reading about a study done by Cornell University that asked New Yorkers if they believed the environmental risks of gas drilling were worth the economic benefit to the state. Apparently, there is some difference across geographical boundaries when it comes to how New Yorkers answer that question (surprise, surprise, pepole in the city are more likely to believe fracing is environmentally bad). As a marketer, I understand the reason for the poll. But this isn't exactly a consumer question like "Do you like ice cream?" Its a question thats asking people for opinions on things they are not necessarily qualified to make a determination on. Its like asking "Do you believe in gravity?"
Have we regressed so far in our educations that we now believe we can question the laws of nature when they don't suit our needs? Take the gentleman in Avella, PA who claims his water was contaminated by gas drilling. Atlas Energy, the company in question tested his well and found nothing. (Note: the testing isn't actually done by the company, they hire a lab qualified to do the work). DEP came out and tested the well next and found the exact same thing. Spokeswoman Helen Humphries said on KDKA-TV last week that the samples came back as your basic Western Pennsylvania water. Basic PA water doesn't include chemical concentrations that are of concern when it comes to human ingestion. But of course DEP is lying -- they are in cahoots with industry, doctoring the the lab results of two independent laboratories. Yet no one else is forking over the money to have it tested again.
Its no wonder those Asian kids keep beating Americans in science and math. We seem to think we can manipulate scientific law for our own purposes. Or at least make facts essay questions.
One petroleum geologist who testified at the EPA hearing last week wrote in the Post-Gazette this week that he was booed and cursed by the audience for giving a simple scientific explaination of how fracing works, and how its severely unlikely it could cause acquifer contamination. He warned anti-drilling interests who seem committed to doing everything they can to vilify this process that the only way the would ever be able to really do this was to overturn the laws of physics. More letters to the editor telling him that his years of education and experience in science didn't prove a thing ensued.
A gentleman I follow on LinkedIn with a scientific background may be the one who put it best. He noted that this same controversey follows most environmental discussions. Industry finds new technology, puts it to work, and finds out that its a great way to do things. Concerned citizens question the process and ask for explaination. In most cases that brew to this extreme, many in the general public cannot grasp the intricate scientific details of the question they asked, are somewhat concerned that they don't understand, and in their own ignorance, decide that the principal or process in question is wrong or polluting beacuse they don't get it. That and the fact that today people take their environmental science from Leonardo DiCaprio and Mark Ruffalo -- people who know absolutely nothing about science, except that people like them will think they're smart and altruistic and spend $10.50 a piece to see their new movie.
Somewhere along the way we decided that its bad for Exxon to make a profit, and beacuse Dick Cheney (who by the way isn't an oilman -- he was in government his whole life until Haliburton hired him to help get contracts between Republican administrations) isn't Miss Congeniality that there isn't a single trustworthy person in the oil and gas industry. And yet, the majority of people refuse to curtail their energy use to make dependence on these "evil" people less necessary. Lets forget the fact that the people out there risking their lives everyday, and some not risking their lives but working hard for the industry none the less, produce the energy we need to make the world work. Without them, there are not LCD TVS, heating, cooling, Blackberries or Wiis.
These folks have years of experience doing what they do, and prior to that, years of education in science and math and all of that boring, way-over-our-heads stuff none of the rest of us ever wanted to master on our own. And we have the audacity to believe a 21-year-old unemployed kid with a video camera when we want scientific facts.
As my dad, who has been right before, tells me all the time, this little problem of ours is why this country doesn't make anything anymore. Or more acurately, why we are now, and will likely continue depending on people who hate us for energy.
Good thing we got the Industrial Revolution out of the way before the environmental extremism came along. Instead of builiding the modern world through people like Edison, Carnegie, Westinghouse, Ford, and Whitney, we'd still be in public forums asking them to explain how they could possibly be smarter than any of us.