The University of Colorado Boulder has an article up about a paper [open, DOI: 10.1038/s41562-018-0520-3] [DX] published Monday in Nature Human Behavior which finds that U.S. adults:
who hold the most extreme views opposing genetically modified (GM) foods think they know most about GM food science, but actually know the least
The paper's key finding is that:
the more strongly people report being opposed to GM foods, the more knowledgeable they think they are on the topic, but the lower they score on an actual knowledge test.
Interestingly the authors found similar results applied to gene therapy, but were unable prove a similar conclusion when they tested against climate change denialism. This leads them to hypothesize that:
the climate change debate has become so politically polarized that people's attitudes depend more on which group they affiliate with than how much they know about the issue.
It might be instructive to run similar studies in a number of areas such as
Vaccinations
Nuclear Power
Homeopathy
...
Where would you like to see this study done next?
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Wednesday January 16 2019, @04:54AM
That, and they've funded Animal Liberation Front efforts before. ALF in this case isn't a loveable alien life form from the 1980's, but a friggin' terrorist group that has members convicted of arson and bombing and such. And PETA gives those guys money.
Oh, and PETA also kills most of the animals put in its care. That shows you how much they really care about animals.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.