So there's no surprise that people who read science magazines, love Adam Spencer and Brian Cox and attend science festivals think science is pretty darn great.

Science communicator Dr Craig Cormick says these "fan boys and fan girls" of science have never been more engaged. "They've having a ball," he says.

The problem is, not everyone feels this way. Not everyone, especially a growing number of young people in Australia, see the value in science.

"That's a big, big worry," says Cormick.

In a comprehensive report conducted for CSIRO Cormick found about 40 per cent of the Australian public were unengaged, disinterested or wary of science.

"We even found some of those people were belligerent against science, they had a strong anti-science view," he says. Previous research has found people will reject information or evidence if it runs counter to their beliefs.

The result suggests little improvement since 2011, when a Victorian government study documented a similar pattern.

"There's a lot of effort going into science communication, but it's not having a big impact on the unengaged," he says.

Some of consequences of this trend are the 20-year decline in the proportion of high school students selecting science and maths subjects in their final school years. The federal government's dramatic cuts to research suggests science is not their top priority either.

Science has become its own worst enemy, says Cormick.

"It's become what it is perceived to be – an elite knowledge group," he says.

One of the main conclusions of his study on community attitudes towards science and technology is that what influences a person's thoughts is more important than the attitude itself.

"We've spent decades trying to understand people's attitudes towards science and technology, but the deeper level is why do people have those attitudes," he says.

A person's attitudes are heavily influenced by their values, which develop from a complex mix of environment, upbringing, parents and peers. Most importantly, a person's values are hard to change and are immune to facts.

A good way to consider values is to think of your favourite sporting team, says Cormick.

"You don't change your support for them regardless of evidence that they're not going to win that year," he says.

But your attitude on who should be captain will change based on who is in good form, he says.

So while values might disregard evidence, attitudes are open to change.

"That's why it's important to understand the value that drives the attitude," he says.

For the 40 per cent of Australians not interested in science, Cormick says the challenge is to uncover how many lack an interest in science versus those who have strong anti-science values.

To engage the uninterested, communicators need to align their science messages with what these groups value.

If young people care about fashion, consumer technology, sport and celebrities, why don't educators infuse science lessons with a little Miley Cyrus?

If you ignore the pop-star's suggestive poses and nakedness, her hit song Wrecking Ball is the perfect primer to pendulums, a key concept covered in high school science.

Popular shows like MasterChef and Top Gear are the ideal place to introduce the public to ideas in chemistry and physics, says Cormick.

The medium of the message also matters; TV and movies are better places to reach young, uninterested youth than online, he says.

To be truly effective, the engagement has to occur inside and outside of school, and needs input of people outside the science communication bubble.

"As long as those people are setting the education curriculum, setting the social discourse for science communications, it's never going to reach the others," he says.

Science education researcher Terry Lyons says the consequences of living in a society filled with people who don't value, or understand science, are profound.

Every Australian has an equal vote so it is important for a healthy democracy that the public understand science issues such as climate change, GM crops and coal seam gas, says Lyons, an associate professor at the Queensland University of Technology.

More generally, scientific thinking helps a person evaluate evidence.

"There's all sorts of people in advertising wearing coats telling people what to eat and what to put on their skin," says Lyons.

Cormick says there is little hope of converting many of those who hold truly anti-science values.

Facts won't change the mind of someone with anti-climate change values, he says.

"It's the same with GM foods, nanotechnology, vaccination and fluoridation," he says.

In the same way there are diehard liberal or conservative voters, some people will never be convinced of the benefits of science, he says.

"You can chip off a few of them with science by stealth, but those who are belligerently against science as a value are probably immune," he says.

End note: Astute observers of Cyrus's Wrecking Ball music video would notice her wrecking ball is not quite right because its period – the time it takes to swing back and forth – is too short for the length of the chain.

The period of a pendulum depends on the pendulum length, and to a small extent the width of its swing, but is independent of its mass.