"How does it feel to share company with"

When I was first asked this, it was from an aggressive account responding to my position about enhanced crops vaccines.  The tweet was amongst a few that were pointing out my frequenting the Facebook group "We Love GMOs and Vaccines"

"How do you feel sharing company with Neidenbach"?

I honestly didn't know how to respond, mostly because I had not heard the name before.  It's not too surprising; Neidenbach is a middle school teacher in the USA.  My social and professional circles overlap only in our mutual interest in science - it'd be like me asking why a Baptist missionary hasn't heard of the Reverend Doctor John Brown; the only common thing between them is that they both work in the same field (in that example, religion).

For context, someone had taken offence to my saying that vaccines are not scary or evil, and searched for me on other social media sites in order to find who I am, what I do, and why I would care to promote something they disagree with.  Their first thought was that I, a vaccine and agriscience proponent, should not associate on a facebook group for those interests.  Their friends leapt in to support them, praising them and generally trying to tell me I was a bad person, attacking my character as they went.

Now not knowing who Neidenbach was, their comment made me pause.  Were they some kind of psychopath like the "Doctor Death" scandal of rural Queensland?  A Nazi scientist?  A pharmaceutical executive caught in a corruption scandal?  Google didn't help - turns out there are a lot of paediatricians, podiatrists, and engineers with that name, and it turns out that Neidenbach really is just a middle school teacher trying to help people to understand science.  My questing wasn't going to go any further, as after that the person launched into attacks about vaccines, and when I didn't fold to their onslaught, they blocked me, and I moved on with life - though I didn't forget the encounter.

More recently, I questioned some people claiming that the Australian celebrity "Waleed Aly" had orchestrated legal attacks on people because reasons reasons something Islam.  During the exchange, various Islamophobic people jumped in to try and belittle me for being skeptical of the claims.  Before leaving them to pat one another on the back, I was struck by the similarities - if someone says something person X does not like, try to chase them off the topic.

Immunology, agricultural science, bioscience, horticultural science, and climate science are all familiar with this, the opposition's core primarily comprised of people who profit from fear and ignorance of these fields.  It's also been growing as a tactic and tool for political extremists - something video gamers, refugee advocates, and equal rights advocates have been facing to increasing degrees, primarily lead by people who profit from fear and ignorance of these topics.

Notice the common point there?  Any group or movement can have people who spoil it for everyone, and corruption is a thing that we humans love to do with everything, from beliefs to sciences and all things between.  In all endeavours, it is knowledge that allows these people to be stopped - and ignorance that allows them to thrive.  Ignorance makes what they say seem reasonable, and their lies sound plausible.

Which is why the rise of ignorance in politics has been frightening.  Every time this has occurred, people have taken advantage of fear to their advantage - and if the people were lucky, they were only fleeced of their belongings or money.  More commonly, the unchecked rise of hate and corruption caused rights to disappear, and lives to be lost.  The ignorant amongst them, who only hours or days before had been celebrating that someone with power listened to them and protected their ignorance and fear.

So it comes as no surprise that people who speak out to educate others garner hatred.  We humans love the idea that you can protect yourself from hepatitis by eating a slightly more expensive but otherwise entirely normal food.  We love the idea that we're doing the right things to promote an equal society.  We love the idea that our lifestyle habits won't cost millions of people their lives and homes.  We love that we can make a stand against Big Industry-X (agriculture, medicine, etc) and prevent them from poisoning us and our loved ones.  We love the neat boxes we can put those people who look different or talk different or have different hobbies.  Who wouldn't angrily defend what they love?  I won't ask anyone to not defend their interests.  I will, however, ask people to assess those interests.

"Check your fire", if you will, before you shoot the messenger.

1. If someone makes a claim, check it.  Priests would once caution that Satan uses silken words, and in modern times we know how con artists work: "Honey catches more flies than vinegar", and "The bigger the lie, the more convincing it sounds".  Remember that a story is not worth as much as a study, and a study is not worth as much as a study tested by competitors who want to find the flaws - we call this "peer review", and scientists welcome it.  If someone gets aggressive for questioning them or their claim, then chances are that they don't want you to find the flaws in their story.
2. If someone says that studies cannot be trusted, follow the money.  Research scientists don't pocket forty thousand dollars per session to come and speak on the topic - rather, they spend any money they can get on lab equipment, chemicals, and other things they need for their craft.  When someone says "They just want to make money off of you, buy my book/ticket/etc and see", the key part is "buy my".
3. If someone can only defend their argument by attacking the people who counter them, then chances are that their opponents are correct - especially if they start lying to do so.  If people around you do that, consider that it's time for a change of beliefs.  Frustration can make people make mistakes, but beware those who hurt others.  Even if they claim it's "for the greater good", or "for a good cause", they're still hurting others for disagreeing with them.
4. If you don't understand a controversial topic, then get information from both sides.  Use the above tips as broad guidelines, though in today's world both sides might even be guilty of the above.  You are obviously welcome to support any side you wish - but my interest is that you remember that those who lie to, take advantage of, or hurt others will do it to anyone, including those who help them.

As for scientists, advocates, and supporters of various topics?  Remember, the people who fuel ignorant fear want as much exposure as they can get to people who don't know much about the topic.  It sucks, but when that starts happening, we need people to do the same thing.  Show respect, but speak up if you hear people talking about topics you work with.  Take opportunities to speak to the press about your area of expertise.  Write in to schools and colleges with your corrections if someone pushes mistakes.  Little steps accumulate.  Even a little understanding of the topic may make a parent or voter notice that what they're being told doesn't add up; and that's the biggest success.

As I said at the start of this, when I was asked about associating long ago, I didn't know who this "Neidenbach" was, so I had pause.  Since then, I've seen the work he does, the fight he takes to help people learn, and the sheer spiteful animosity that he garners for threatening an industry of fear.  Even if we don't always agree, he backs up what he says with science, and bases his stances on reason.

So, if I were asked that same challenge today, about Neidenbach or anyone who promotes honesty despite adversity, I'd have a better response.

"Honoured."

Keep up the good work, people, and thank you.