- 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
A question for the "trust the experts" crowd:
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:35 pm
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:35 pm
How many times do the experts have to be wrong before you stop trusting them without question?
Perma-ban for first person that says "Tree-fiddy"
Perma-ban for first person that says "Tree-fiddy"
12
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:38 pm to oogabooga68
This is something that needs to be stopped wholesale. The whole environmental movement is based on these arse hats. Experts should never have a 95% consensus. There should be debate and disagreement within their ranks but there never is anymore. It shows you it’s all scam anyways
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:40 pm to EGCROSS
No, I'm looking for a serious commitment from the "trust the experts and do not question" crowd.
If the "experts" whose Gospel you follow are wrong 50% of the time, doesn't it make sense to question them?
Legit looking for a number of some sort.
If the "experts" whose Gospel you follow are wrong 50% of the time, doesn't it make sense to question them?
Legit looking for a number of some sort.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:42 pm to oogabooga68
Fear is a MOFO for the faint of heart
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:43 pm to oogabooga68
I do trust SOME experts. Like the Stanford Profs/MDs who are conducting antibody testing without one red cent in help from the CDC, NIH or any other so-called fed-bureaucratic epidemic experts.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:43 pm to oogabooga68
And I was replying. The environmental crowd has also been wrong 90% of the time since the 60s and 70s. There was gonna be an ice age, then we’re going to run out of oil, then we’re going to have global warming, then the oceans are going to rise and you won’t be able to live in Miami or south Louisiana. I’m agreeing with your statement I’m just using another example to show the absurdity of everything.
This post was edited on 4/28/20 at 12:47 pm
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:43 pm to oogabooga68
No offense to the OP, but this is the wrong question.
You really SHOULD, as a rule, "trust" experts.
BUT, it may seem a small thing but I left out the word "the" for a reason. The problem isn't experts. The problem is the concept of THE experts.
For example. On the subject of shutting down. There are exactly zero humans who would qualify as "expert" in all facets of the decision. ZERO.
So, if you hear someone say, "I agree with 'the experts'", you have to wonder who the frick they are talking about.
You really SHOULD, as a rule, "trust" experts.
BUT, it may seem a small thing but I left out the word "the" for a reason. The problem isn't experts. The problem is the concept of THE experts.
For example. On the subject of shutting down. There are exactly zero humans who would qualify as "expert" in all facets of the decision. ZERO.
So, if you hear someone say, "I agree with 'the experts'", you have to wonder who the frick they are talking about.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:44 pm to oogabooga68
Jim is relaxing on his hotel balcony and watching the planes take off and land. While he is watching, he sees a plane crash upon landing and turn into a ball of flames.
Jim thinks to himself "A trained pilot was flying that plane which was maintained by people who allegedly are experts! They don't know anything".
Jim decides to fly himself home, having never flown before.
Does Jim make it home alive? Do you think his chances of making it home alive are better or worse?
Jim thinks to himself "A trained pilot was flying that plane which was maintained by people who allegedly are experts! They don't know anything".
Jim decides to fly himself home, having never flown before.
Does Jim make it home alive? Do you think his chances of making it home alive are better or worse?
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:45 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
No offense to the OP, but this is the wrong question. You really SHOULD, as a rule, "trust" experts. BUT, it may seem a small thing but I left out the word "the" for a reason. The problem isn't experts. The problem is the concept of THE experts. For example. On the subject of shutting down. There are exactly zero humans who would qualify as "expert" in all facets of the decision. ZERO. So, if you hear someone say, "I agree with 'the experts'", you have to wonder who the frick they are talking about.
very good summary
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:45 pm to oogabooga68
The whole thing is a logical fallacy. When you think something is true simply because the person saying it claims to be an expert, you set yourself up for believing something false. No matter how much experience an "expert" might have, they are still a fallible human.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:46 pm to Tiguar
quote:
Jim is relaxing on his hotel balcony and watching the planes take off and land. While he is watching, he sees a plane crash upon landing and turn into a ball of flames.
Jim thinks to himself "A trained pilot was flying that plane which was maintained by people who allegedly are experts! They don't know anything".
Jim decides to fly himself home, having never flown before.
Does Jim make it home alive? Do you think his chances of making it home alive are better or worse?
Your analogy is shite.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:47 pm to oogabooga68
The "experts" can never actually be wrong, according to some. They are just "using the scientific method" until they get it right. But these people don't even know what the scientific method is. They think a bunch of people agreeing with each other is the scientific method.
It's not. In reality, every hypothesis must be questioned and thoroughly examined. You don't make DECISIONS based on a "predictive" model. You gather information ("data") and from there, and ONLY from there do you even have a starting point to predict anything. Then you test that hypothesis, or model.
They used fear as a means to skip through all of the scientific testing, and locked everything down to "prevent" a worst case scenario. Only, what real experts all agree on, based on actual scientific data collected over decades, is that by preventing herd immunity, we aren't mitigating anything, and so we're just killing the economy and putting people on the streets in the process, while not preventing the spread of the disease. The disease WILL spread. But eventually it will have run it's course. That's life.
It's not. In reality, every hypothesis must be questioned and thoroughly examined. You don't make DECISIONS based on a "predictive" model. You gather information ("data") and from there, and ONLY from there do you even have a starting point to predict anything. Then you test that hypothesis, or model.
They used fear as a means to skip through all of the scientific testing, and locked everything down to "prevent" a worst case scenario. Only, what real experts all agree on, based on actual scientific data collected over decades, is that by preventing herd immunity, we aren't mitigating anything, and so we're just killing the economy and putting people on the streets in the process, while not preventing the spread of the disease. The disease WILL spread. But eventually it will have run it's course. That's life.
This post was edited on 4/28/20 at 12:50 pm
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:49 pm to Tiguar
quote:
Jim is relaxing on his hotel balcony and watching the planes take off and land. While he is watching, he sees a plane crash upon landing and turn into a ball of flames.
Jim thinks to himself "A trained pilot was flying that plane which was maintained by people who allegedly are experts! They don't know anything".
Jim decides to fly himself home, having never flown before.
Does Jim make it home alive? Do you think his chances of making it home alive are better or worse?
Upvote.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 12:56 pm to Tiguar
quote:
Jim is relaxing on his hotel balcony and watching the planes take off and land. While he is watching, he sees a plane crash upon landing and turn into a ball of flames.
Jim thinks to himself "A trained pilot was flying that plane which was maintained by people who allegedly are experts! They don't know anything".
Jim decides to fly himself home, having never flown before.
Does Jim make it home alive? Do you think his chances of making it home alive are better or worse?
This analogy would be great if it remotely paralleled this situation. It does not.
Nobody is saying WE should make all of the decisions from our coaches. We're saying that these so-called experts are not experts. They are either idiots, or they are liars. I think they might be both.
There are real experts out there. They've given us the data that actually matches what's happening on "the ground", as it were. Those experts are being ignored. Because they don't fit the agenda.
Why do you have a hard time believing that someone who may be highly educated, would lie to you? It happens all the time.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 1:06 pm to Metaloctopus
quote:
There are real experts out there. They've given us the data that actually matches what's happening on "the ground", as it were. Those experts are being ignored. Because they don't fit the agenda.
This is the neat scam that has been pulled on people many times and has fostered the feelings in people like the OP.
I can't count the times in the last several years when there were public debates on issues where, if one looked for it, one would discover that "experts" had notably varying opinions.
Yet, if you turned on the TV or read the major publications, you'd conclude that expert opinion was nearly unanimous.
THAT's the scam. We conflate "the experts" with what really could be described as "experts the MSM has chosen to show us"
THEN, we conclude that if you're an expert that the MSN won't book, that means you're less of an expert.
Which is just a bunch of happy horse shite.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 1:18 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
This is the neat scam that has been pulled on people many times and has fostered the feelings in people like the OP.
I can't count the times in the last several years when there were public debates on issues where, if one looked for it, one would discover that "experts" had notably varying opinions.
Yet, if you turned on the TV or read the major publications, you'd conclude that expert opinion was nearly unanimous.
THAT's the scam. We conflate "the experts" with what really could be described as "experts the MSM has chosen to show us"
THEN, we conclude that if you're an expert that the MSN won't book, that means you're less of an expert.
Which is just a bunch of happy horse shite
Couldn't agree more.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 1:22 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
The problem is the concept of THE experts.
Exactly my point.
We are being force-fed a narrative by people who desperately scream "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain".
"The experts" whose word we've been bullied into taking without question have gotten it wrong many, many times as it relates to Covid.
My question is to those who laugh at those who have the nerve to dissent: How often do "the experts" have to be wrong before it's OK to question them.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 1:23 pm to Metaloctopus
quote:
There are real experts out there. They've given us the data that actually matches what's happening on "the ground", as it were. Those experts are being ignored. Because they don't fit the agenda.
This sounds an awful lot like you just being pissed that the supposed experts who agree with your agenda aren't being given the credibility you believe they should get.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 1:23 pm to EGCROSS
quote:
The environmental crowd has also been wrong 90% of the time since the 60s and 70s
Sorry, I didn't mean "you" in particular, I understand we are in agreement.
Posted on 4/28/20 at 1:25 pm to LSUfanGuy13
quote:
This sounds an awful lot like you just being pissed that the supposed experts who agree with your agenda aren't being given the credibility you believe they should get.
Or maybe pissed because in many cases they are being outright censored and ignored by many platforms and publishers who don't like dissent.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News