- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Politics Disguised as Science: When to Doubt a Scientific ‘Consensus’
Posted on 4/23/17 at 9:14 am
Posted on 4/23/17 at 9:14 am
quote:
This week’s March for Science is odd. Marches are usually held to defend something that’s in peril. Does anyone really think big science is in danger? The mere fact that the March was scheduled for Earth Day betrays what the event is really about: politics. The organizers admitted as much early on, though they’re now busy trying to cover the event in sciencey camouflage.
If past is prologue, expect to hear a lot about the supposed “consensus” on catastrophic climate change this week. The purpose of this claim is to shut up skeptical non-scientists.
How should non-scientists respond when told about this consensus? We can’t all study climate science. But since politics often masquerades as science, we need a way to tell one from the other.
“Consensus,” according to Merriam-Webster, means both “general agreement” and “group solidarity in sentiment and belief.” That sums up the problem. Is this consensus based on solid evidence and sound logic, or social pressure and groupthink?
When can you doubt a consensus? Your best bet is to look at the process that produced, defends and transmits the supposed consensus.
Anyone who has studied the history of science knows that scientists are prone to herd instincts. Many false ideas once enjoyed consensus. Indeed, the “power of the paradigm” often blinds scientists to alternatives to their view. Question the paradigm, and some respond with anger.
thestream.org
4
Posted on 4/23/17 at 9:18 am to L.A.
An article telling climate skeptics how to respond to those who push "scientific consensus".
This seems a lot like those "marching orders" you hear so much about around here.
This seems a lot like those "marching orders" you hear so much about around here.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 9:22 am to TotesMcGotes
quote:
An article telling climate skeptics how to respond to those who push "scientific consensus".
This seems a lot like those "marching orders" you hear so much about around here.
The OP should have posted the March For Science tweet straight from the Twitter account that discussed this was an SJW march for rights and not science.
Progressives are now attempting to change the very definition of science. This will not end well.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 9:24 am to EZE Tiger Fan
Please do. I haven't seen that yet.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 9:27 am to EZE Tiger Fan
It Was sad to see all those signs of immigrant rights at a march for science.
What
A
fricking
Joke
What
A
fricking
Joke
Posted on 4/23/17 at 9:29 am to CptBengal
Settle down, dog condoms.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 9:31 am to TotesMcGotes
quote:
Please do. I haven't seen that yet.
SFP posted it in the OT thread on this topic yesterday.
Believe it was on the first page.
As someone who holds a terminal degree and has done a lot of "research" myself back in the day, this is a VERY dangerous direction to go.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 9:32 am to L.A.
We should always doubt "consensus" and be skeptical of any orthodoxy. While Newton was right about a bunch of things, if Einstein (and others) had just accepted it blindly (i.e. "religion") instead of questioning/testing/challenging (i.e. "science") where would we be right now?
Posted on 4/23/17 at 9:37 am to L.A.
The "science guy" is mad.
Loon
Bill Nye, known for his 1990’s science kid’s show who has since become an outspoken advocate on “climate change,” accused CNN of doing a “disservice” to its audience on Saturday by having a real scientist on their network to discuss climate change.
The CNN “New Day Saturday” panel, which included Nye and William Happer, a physicist at Princeton University,” became heated after Happer said the climate change that Nye talks about is a “myth.”
Loon
Bill Nye, known for his 1990’s science kid’s show who has since become an outspoken advocate on “climate change,” accused CNN of doing a “disservice” to its audience on Saturday by having a real scientist on their network to discuss climate change.
The CNN “New Day Saturday” panel, which included Nye and William Happer, a physicist at Princeton University,” became heated after Happer said the climate change that Nye talks about is a “myth.”
Posted on 4/23/17 at 9:46 am to Crimson Wraith
quote:
The CNN “New Day Saturday” panel, which included Nye and William Happer, a physicist at Princeton University,” became heated after Happer said the climate change that Nye talks about is a “myth.”
This is why the push from the left to redefine what science is will be frightening.
Remember, one of HRC's first campaign promises was to level "environmental justice" to combat the social injustices of climate change.
The Progs were oh so close to having their way here. That's why this funding to pay for the "consensus" is causing them to lose their collective minds. If the "scientists" are no longer paid to give the results the progs want, their next major wealth redistribution scheme is shot to shite.
Posted on 4/23/17 at 10:20 am to L.A.
Nye is educated beyond his intelligence, and he does not realize how much he does not know. He takes one side of a controversial topic says things that are not true to bolster his argument. He ignores recent data because it proves him wrong.
smh
smh
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News