Flashcards Friday! How to Talk to Someone Who Doesn’t Trust Science
It’s Flashcards Friday, and today I want to talk about something that matters as much as any experiment: how we talk to people who do not trust science. Not how to win an argument. Not how to humiliate someone with a fact. How to build a bridge. Because science does not spread by volume. It spreads when people feel safe enough to be curious.
Today’s flashcards are three practical tools: Empirical evidence, Evidence-based science, and Bridge language.
Flashcard 1: “Empirical evidence”
Empirical evidence is the kind of evidence you can observe, measure, or test.
If you can check it with your senses or instruments, it is empirical. A thermometer reading. A lab result. A measured change over time. A clinical trial outcome. Even a carefully recorded pattern in nature.
A simple way to say it in conversation is:
“Empirical means we did not guess. We checked.”
And here is the bridge-building move: do not start by saying “You are wrong.” Start by asking:
“What kind of evidence would you consider fair?”
That question lowers defensiveness because it gives the other person a role in the process.
Flashcard 2: “Evidence-based science”
Evidence-based science is not a vibe. It’s not a slogan. It’s a method.
Evidence-based science means:
- We make a claim.
- We test it.
- We try to prove ourselves wrong.
- We let other people check the work.
- And if better evidence shows up, we update.
A simple way to say this is:
“Science is not about being certain. It’s about being checkable.”
And if the person says, “The science keeps changing,” you can say:
“You’re right. That’s what happens when new evidence arrives. Changing your mind is not a failure. It’s the point.”
Flashcard 3: “Speak at their level”
This does not mean talking down. It means talking in a way that matches how most humans decide what feels real.
Here are three bridge phrases you can use.
Bridge phrase #1: Start with shared goals.
“Can we agree we both want people to be safe and healthy?”
or
“Can we agree we both want the best information, not a story that just feels good?”
Bridge phrase #2: Separate facts from choices.
“Evidence helps explain what’s happening and what could go wrong. The choices that follow aren’t scientific questions, they’re value judgments about what matters most.”
That sentence disarms people who fear they are being pushed into a policy position.
Bridge phrase #3: Offer a test, not a lecture.
Instead of “Here’s a study,” try:
“Let’s look at what would count as a fair test.”
or
“If this claim were false, what would we expect to see instead?”
That keeps the conversation in science-mode, not tribal-mode.
The three conversation traps to avoid
Trap 1: The vocabulary flex.
If you use words to prove you are smarter, people will protect their pride instead of listening.
Trap 2: The link dump.
Throwing ten studies at someone who is overwhelmed rarely changes their mind. It usually ends the conversation.
Trap 3: The insult disguised as a fact.
Even if the fact is correct, contempt is contagious. It spreads resistance, not understanding.
A simple three-step “bridge” method (the thing you can remember)
If you remember nothing else, remember this:
1) Ask. “What concerns you most about this?”
2) Align. “That makes sense. We both want the best information.”
3) Offer. “Can I show you what would count as a fair test, and why scientists trust it?”
That is how skepticism becomes curiosity.
If we want evidence-based science to survive in public life, we need more than facts. We need bridge-builders. So the next time you feel the urge to argue, try a different mission: invite someone closer to the evidence.
Because in the end, science is not just knowledge. Science is a way of learning together.
FURTHER READING
National Academies of Sciences — Communicating Science Effectively
Pew Research Center — https://www.pewresearch.org
Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science https://aldacenter.org
Science History Institute — Evidence, experiments, and scientific methods
https://www.sciencehistory.org