"Rather than fill the information deficit by building an arsenal of facts, scientists should instead consider how they deploy their knowledge. They may have more luck communicating if, in addition to presenting facts and figures, they appeal to emotions. " - Apparently, doing science alone is not enough any more.
This article appears to begin with the proposal that "scientists" could/should describe a homogeneous group with a uniform (settled) view on what could be classified as partly political rather than purely scientific issues ("bizarre and inaccurate ideas about science, from climate change and vaccines to guns and genetically modified organisms").
It's an odd place to start. Given that scientists are also humans, my null hypothesis would be inhomogeneity.
