Scientists in the United States are mobilising to organise a March for Science. What originated online as a discussion about how to push back against the anti-science stance of Donald Trump’s administration rapidly gathered support from concerned scientists and non-scientists alike. A march on Washington similar to the Women’s March was proposed, and within 24 hours the group’s Twitter account had gained an additional 124,000 followers. Over half a million people have also joined a new Facebook page, which has become a hive of comments, suggestions and coordination. An event in the US capital is planned for March, with activities occurring in other countries.

EPA staff experiencing stress and fears Trump will suppress climate science Read more

The group’s mission statement begins with “There are certain things that we accept as facts … The Earth is becoming warmer due to human action. The diversity of life arose by evolution”. Both president Trump and vice president Pence have expressed scepticism about humans’ role in global warming and the theory of evolution. But what is prompting scientists to come out of the lab and onto the streets is that these sentiments are being rapidly translated into actions by the new administration.



According to documents obtained by a number of news agencies, staff at the Environmental Protection Agency, and the departments of the Interior, Agriculture, and Health and Human Services have been ordered not to send out news releases, create new blog entries or update official website content. They also must seek agreement from senior officials before speaking to the media and in some instances Congress. This prompted a group of US Senators to write to President Trump to remind him that it is against the law to interfere with federal employees’ communications to Congress.

The National Parks Service was temporarily banned from tweeting after retweeting images comparing Trump and Obama’s inaugurations. In a show of resistance, the official Twitter account of Badlands National Park appeared to go rogue, posting a now-deleted series of tweets stating well-established facts about climate change. Other park accounts have also sent out climate-related tweets that appear to defy Trump. These actions follow on from Energy Department managers being contacted by Trump’s transition team in order to identify individuals who have taken part in international climate talks over the past five years.

I contacted four US scientists to understand their reactions to these developments, and to find out why they are prepared to march for science.



Elizabeth Hadly, professor of biology, geological and environmental sciences at Stanford University, has spent more than 30 years studying the impacts of environmental change on animal biodiversity. She explained that “scientists have battled the political and ideological forces against concepts such as evolution and climate change for years. We have patiently articulated the physical and biological laws governing the universe, assembled the data, and presented it in the pages of journals, at public seminars, to the halls of Congress. What is occurring now against science and scientists in the US goes beyond ideology and political party. Now we find our discourse under attack.”



James Hansen, former director of Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies testified to the US Congress about the dangers of climate change in the 1980s. He welcomed the plans for the march, saying that it was “an overdue change for scientists to become more active. Scientists understand the urgent danger that we could leave young people a climate system out of control.”



Professor Anthony D. Barnosky of Stanford University is an expert in past planetary changes, and what they mean for forecasting the changes to come on Planet Earth in the next few decades. “Scientists deal in facts, not politics, so most are reticent about speaking out. Social media and the halls of scientific institutions are now abuzz with scientists upset about an administration trying to muzzle the facts that don’t agree with certain political agendas. That they are ready to march on Washington, tells you just how serious this is”, he said. Barnosky’s concerns are grounded on some fundamental aspects of science. “Basically, the data are the data, and the public has a right to know, so that they can participate in democracy. Filtering the findings of the nation’s government scientists, who are among the best and brightest and whose work is paid for by taxpayer dollars, goes counter to everything America stands for.”

These views were echoed by meteorologist and journalist Eric Holthaus, whose project to protect federal data from the incoming Trump administration was eagerly taken up by scientists. He explained the explosion of interest in the march. “It’s broader than about limiting communication. Scientists are seeing this as a full scale attack on truth itself and the principle that government should take scientific information onboard and incorporate it into policies and so act for society as a whole.”



The leaders of March for Science stress that it is an inclusive movement – organising and participating in marches isn’t restricted to practising scientists. An online form that helps coordinate involvement has received thousands of contributions. What’s become clear is that this is an issue that both scientists and non-scientists are passionate about.



As Hadly argues, “If we cannot discuss facts openly – in public, in academia, in business, in government – how can we have meaningful dialogues so essential to serving people’s needs? How can democracy, based on public discussions and trust in our societal truths, survive? And so we will march.”