4 ms·
In the long run that is correct. However, in decision making, when work is "cutting edge" the opinions of experts/"key opinion leaders" weighs more heavily, or
by pcrh 9y ago
In the long run that is correct. However, in decision making, when work is "cutting edge" the opinions of experts/"key opinion leaders" weighs more heavily, or equal to, data.
For example, it is now >50 years since anthropogenic global warming was first proposed. The first intergovernmental action I can find with a brief search that tackles climate change is the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Legislation surrounding CO2 emissions was not introduced until the 2000's. The matter is still "controversial".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Framework_Convention_on_Climate_Change https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Framework_Conve...
- trevyn 9y agoTo be fair, while we can run controlled experiments on components of this problem, I don't think we can run a global controlled experiment of the entire system, or fully understand the long-term impact of climate change on humans in the face of advancing technology.
- pcrh 9y agoThat problem exists for almost all innovative work. Generally, a paradigm becomes accepted when the predictions that follow from it are found to hold true. For people to make the effort to test such predictions requires (from a human standpoint) a "leap of faith", regardless of the integrity of the data that lead to said paradigm being proposed.