Opinion What's the deal with layman(s) questioning the credentials and scientific ability of actual experts?

[fedoriswar37]

Probably because there are a lot of arrogant idiots among the public, but also because many scientists are indeed paid shills, especially of those who work with environmental problems.
Remember how many times they said we'd run out of oil in 10 years, how holes in the ozone layer are gonna kill us all, etc, etc?

It certainly warrants some amount of scepticism, which idiots take to the extreme and piss you off during your talks.

I mean they did make us stop using certain refrigerant that damage the ozone... JK. While we have to in the west it's free game with the same shit in India China etc.

 

[Andy Capp]

(5) Motivated reasoning.

You claiming,

the left claiming sex is a social construct

an extreme liar

Indeed.

Case closed.

 

[Andy Capp]

And I agree with that. I don't deny biology. If you were born with XY you're male and shouldn't be competing against XX in sports. I simply don't care whether someone born male wants to be treated as a woman or vice versa; it has zero impact on my life.

The issue is people conflating the two to drive rage bait. It's deliberate.

 

[bandicoot]

Do you have the expertise to back up this statement of yours on TV?: "The transition to EVs is absolutely necessary in the fight against climate change."

What a silly thing to ask.

He's an expert, how dare you question him?

 

[Berserker13]

 

[BForrester]

The issue is people conflating the two to drive rage bait. It's deliberate.

Of course it is. It's no different than the old gay marriage debate. People want to hate on other people for making choices with their lives that have no impact of their own. I don't know what's so difficult about treating people with dignity and kindness for some.

 

[wufabufa]

-Dogma
-political narratives
-social narratives
-conflicts of interest(financial or otherwise)
-funding(or losing funding if a study doesn't show favorable data)
-gatekeeping of information
-gaslighting


....in no particular order. All of those things have been sullying good science for decades. Institutions tend to earn distrust over time through willful acts that don't benefit the public, it's usually not something that's automatically baked in when they're started.

 

[Hog-train]

Science gets constantly updated.

What I don't understand is why after all these years we still don't know if eggs are good or bad for you?

 

[Bob Gray]

It’s almost like it’s systematic. Like the process of creating new science involves proving old science wrong. A “scientific process”, if you will.

But this is just a fancy way of saying it was wrong in the first place.

 

[Neph]

But this is just a fancy way of saying it was wrong in the first place.

If you want someone who never admits to being wrong go ask Trump

 

[Bob Gray]

If you want someone who never admits to being wrong go ask Trump

Wow, straight to Trump, huh?

 

[Neph]

Wow, straight to Trump, huh?

I was tossing up going to the Bible as an alternative!

 

[Osculater]

Hell yeah I can't wait for a snu snu robot!

 

[Osculater]

Science gets constantly updated.

What I don't understand is why after all these years we still don't know if eggs are good or bad for you?

Hardboiled up the butt is the healthiest

 

[AmonTobin]

I’m looking after someone with life expectancy of a couple weeks tops. Today the patient’s friends tell me they want to donate blood for his transfusions. I told them if he needs a transfusion he’ll have no problem getting banked blood from an anonymous donor but that they are still free to contribute to the public need by donating their blood.

They asked, “but how do we know he’s getting clean blood?”

I asked what they meant by clean.

They said, “well how do we ensure the blood he receives isn’t from someone who got a Covid vaccine?”.

 

[Berserker13]

Hell yeah I can't wait for a snu snu robot!

I know you're not gen z

 

[deviake]

I’m looking after someone with life expectancy of a couple weeks tops. Today the patient’s friends tell me they want to donate blood for his transfusions. I told them if he needs a transfusion he’ll have no problem getting banked blood from an anonymous donor but that they are still free to contribute to the public need by donating their blood.

They asked, “but how do we know he’s getting clean blood?”

I asked what they meant by clean.

They said, “well how do we ensure the blood he receives isn’t from someone who got a Covid vaccine?”.

 

[Osculater]

I know you're not gen z

 

[Osculater]

I’m looking after someone with life expectancy of a couple weeks tops. Today the patient’s friends tell me they want to donate blood for his transfusions. I told them if he needs a transfusion he’ll have no problem getting banked blood from an anonymous donor but that they are still free to contribute to the public need by donating their blood.

They asked, “but how do we know he’s getting clean blood?”

I asked what they meant by clean.

They said, “well how do we ensure the blood he receives isn’t from someone who got a Covid vaccine?”.

Hahahahahaha! We are doomed

 

[DoctorTaco]

But this is just a fancy way of saying it was wrong in the first place.

Correct! The scientific process is why we no longer believe the earth is the center of the universe and leeching bad blood out will heal you. Both things that were wrong in the first place but treated as fact until scientifically didproven.