News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

The Public's ebbing trust in complex science

Started by jimmy olsen, March 08, 2010, 06:51:39 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

BuddhaRhubarb

Quote from: grumbler on March 08, 2010, 08:59:43 PM
Quote from: PDH on March 08, 2010, 08:52:57 PM
Tomorrow it will get all gayed up when Mart discovers it.
True.  Things really get shrilluminating when Marti and Hans shrillustrate how divergent their views are on a topic like this.  I can't wait.

:lol:

thank you for creating my new favorite forum words! "shrillustrate" = :thumbsup:
:p

Viking

Quote from: Tamas on March 10, 2010, 12:53:46 PM

Well, maybe, but I am not sure. "genetic engineering is teh evöl, stay with the old ways" is cleary ludditism. "let the industry roam, fuck nature" is not nearly the same thing.

yet another case of a false dichotomy
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

BuddhaRhubarb

Quote from: The Larch on March 10, 2010, 08:14:32 AM
Going on a slight tangent, I'd say that the general public's insufficient understanding of science make them distrust more than just climate change. The other main victim of this is genetic engineering and all that stems from it, such as stem cell research, GM foodstuffs, biomedicine, etc. Lots of issues overlap, anti intelectualism, the politization of science, conspiracy theories, and the like.

Larchie speaks les truth.
:p

Berkut

Quote from: Viking on March 10, 2010, 09:41:01 AM
It's correct that people don't understand science. No need for the adjective "complex". It doesn't help that anti-science and luddite buffoons use the real contest and conflict of science to declaim the whole thing bunk and then create a false dichotomy to claim whatever the opposite of science says is true.

Judging by the 3 (out of tens of thousands) emails about frustration with luddites and suggestions on how to process data nothing should be inferred other than some scientists are frustrated with luddites and need suggestions on how to process data (the "trick" thing).

The IPCC and glaciers? WTF. It's conclusions do not require the glacier data. It's scientists (not climate sceptics) who found the glacier error. But more importantly, the fact that an error was found and corrected is not an argument for discarding the corrected conclusion.

POTM, right there.

The funny thing is that you can see the strategy being repeated that was used in the Creationism debate. By largely the exact same people.
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Sheilbh

Quote from: Tamas on March 10, 2010, 09:39:34 AM
Oh and as much as I hate the anti-genetics and anti-tech crowd, anti-man-made-global-warming-ism is not part of that. The radical greens are the anti-tech crowd in this case.
I don't buy this.  I think many scientists are being rather consistent (which doesn't mean they're right) and we're the inconsistent ones.  Which is right, scientists shouldn't be like a Laputan king.  Science is useful for defining the parameters of debate about policy, no more.
Let's bomb Russia!

Viking

Quote from: Sheilbh on March 13, 2010, 07:05:08 PM
Quote from: Tamas on March 10, 2010, 09:39:34 AM
Oh and as much as I hate the anti-genetics and anti-tech crowd, anti-man-made-global-warming-ism is not part of that. The radical greens are the anti-tech crowd in this case.
I don't buy this.  I think many scientists are being rather consistent (which doesn't mean they're right) and we're the inconsistent ones.  Which is right, scientists shouldn't be like a Laputan king.  Science is useful for defining the parameters of debate about policy, no more.

Science should not be politicised, it should be taken on it's own merits and strive to inform the decisions rather than make them. Though, in many cases the scientific information makes the highly expensive and difficult decision obvious. Denial is not an option.
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

Sheilbh

Quote from: Viking on March 13, 2010, 07:10:18 PM
Science should not be politicised, it should be taken on it's own merits and strive to inform the decisions rather than make them. Though, in many cases the scientific information makes the highly expensive and difficult decision obvious. Denial is not an option.
Exactly.  It should inform our decisions and our debate, but that's it really.
Let's bomb Russia!

Viking

Quote from: Sheilbh on March 13, 2010, 07:21:42 PM
Quote from: Viking on March 13, 2010, 07:10:18 PM
Science should not be politicised, it should be taken on it's own merits and strive to inform the decisions rather than make them. Though, in many cases the scientific information makes the highly expensive and difficult decision obvious. Denial is not an option.
Exactly.  It should inform our decisions and our debate, but that's it really.

Yes, Multiple Stab Wounds Being Harmful to Monkeys is not up for debate though. Arguing for a policy that presumes that they aren't is not rational.
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

The Brain

The public shouldn't get the vote. Film at 11.
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

Viking

Quote from: The Brain on March 13, 2010, 07:43:51 PM
The public shouldn't get the vote. Film at 11.

QuoteIt has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.
        Sir Winston Churchill
        British politician (1874 - 1965)

First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.