I missed one......Electrons are smaller than atoms. (T/F).  My brain got scrambled for a second.

With math/sci you get real solid answers, not interpreted or inferred meanings that change with the view of the reader. I hate the fact that science is only 3 weeks per grading period for elementary kids. Not nearly enough .

What can we do as a society to help advance science among the whole population?

Scientific Integrity in Policy Making
Investigation of the Bush administration's abuse of science

On February 18, 2004, 62 preeminent scientists including Nobel laureates, National Medal of Science recipients, former senior advisers to administrations of both parties, numerous members of the National Academy of Sciences, and other well-known researchers released a statement titled Restoring Scientific Integrity in Policy Making. In this statement, the scientists charged the Bush administration with widespread and unprecedented "manipulation of the process through which science enters into its decisions."

The scientists’ statement made brief reference to specific cases that illustrate this pattern of behavior. In conjunction with the statement, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) released detailed documentation backing up the scientists’ charges in its report, Scientific Integrity in Policy Making.

Regrettably, The Bush administration has continued to undermine the integrity of science in policy making seemingly unchecked. To document new incidents that surfaced since the report's release, UCS released a second report titled Scientific Integrity in Policy Making: Further investigation of the Bush administration's abuse of science. Read selected cases from the two reports.

The two reports present the following findings:
 
* There is a well established pattern of suppression and distortion of scientific findings by high-ranking Bush administration political appointees across numerous federal agencies. These actions have consequences for human health, public safety, and community well-being.
 
* There is strong documentation of a wide-ranging effort to manipulate the government's scientific advisory system to prevent the appearance of advice that might run counter to the administration's political agenda.
 
* There is evidence that the administration often imposes restrictions on what government scientists can say or write about "sensitive" topics.

* There is significant evidence that the scope and scale of the abuse of science by the Bush administration are unprecedented.

Concern in the scientific community is still growing. Many scientists continue to speak out about their frustration with an administration that has undermined the quality of the science that informs policy making by suppressing, distorting, or manipulating the work done by scientists at federal agencies and on scientific advisory panels. You can find some of the most recent abuses of science as reported by the mainstream and scientific press here.

Snoopy, I understand your point that what we believe as scientific fact today can be changed by future discoveries, either proving or disproving earlier theories, or explainig them further. However, on the whole, I like my solid answers...2+2=4, 2 hydrogen + 1 oxygen will make water. Not 2+2=3 because I interpret it this way, but 2+2=5 because you interpret it another way. We see difference of opinion in the writtten word all the time....just look at the political posts of some of our members.

But does science always provide the "real solid" answers?  Yes, if you consider "we don't know" a solid answer.  There is, and always will be, much that science studies for years with the greatest minds and yet still has only "we don't know" or "we think" as an answer.

To start with we can read what the  Union of Concerned Scientists say.

As a result, I say that one of the most important things we can do in the area of science education is to teach kids how to critically evaluate what they read.

That's a good point.

Add adults, too.

To end with we can throw away everything that UCS and similar liberal pseudo-scientific enviro-nazi groups have to say.

I know what you mean. A regular pseudo-scientific enviro-nazi group isn't so bad, but a liberal pseudo-scientific enviro-nazi group is just more than a person can stand.

All enviro-nazi groups are by definitition also liberal.