5 ms·

Institutions and experts have always been inconsistent. Just look at nutrition science - we've gone from fats are bad, to no carbs are bad, to no wine is actual

Institutions and experts have always been inconsistent. Just look at nutrition science - we've gone from fats are bad, to no carbs are bad, to no wine is actually good. The expectation that the scientific community would find consensus on a novel virus in a matter of months is unreasonable. Personally I've taken @nntaleb reasoning on it - whether or not masks work with certainty is irrelevant; we have good enough data to suggest it works so we take the insurance and wear them. There is nothing wrong with a healthy amount of skepticism; and claims are often muddied through the low pass filter that is Twitter (ex. experts warned that singling out China was racist when American cases came from Italy; we needed far more policy than single out the Chinese). That said, there a mountainous gap between "we are unsure if masks work" to "the president is fighting an underground shadow cabal of pedophiles and blood drinkers." COVID deniers aren't suggesting we don't take vaccines because they are unsure of the effectiveness of vaccines - they are suggesting we don't take vaccines because they are actually microchips by Bill Gates designed to track us. There is a clear difference between misinformation and just plain being wrong - there's a difference between telling me LeBron James is going to win a championship next year and telling me LeBron is actually an alien from Mars who came here to trick us into watching basketball so they could steal all our water. If the President was wrong about LeBron James winning, he would be wrong. If the President was trying to convince me of the latter, then I think that is misinformation.

joe_91 6y ago
Some good points! I do think that most people are not used to how science can change over time and that what most science is is just what the majority of scientists have come to conclude from their independent studies. Most people have not had to deal with greys and prefer things to be black and white. We need a shift towards understanding that the best available information is better than nothing and that the information can change as more better information comes to light. Another thing we need to move away from is crucifying people for getting things wrong - this just doesn't help in the long run. People are fallible and make mistakes. Granted, don't let them make to many in a row but once in a while needs to be acceptable.
- UncleOxidant 6y ago
  > most people are not used to how science can change over time We need more education on the scientific method and how it works.
- ahepp 6y ago
  I think the statement that "science can change over time", though true, is improper to use in most cases. The transition between different models of the atom is a great example of science changing over time. The existing theory explained some things, but not others. The superseding theory explained the previous observations, and made new falsifiable predictions that could not be refuted at the time. The conflicting claims about fats and carbs is an example of that excuse not holding water. We're talking about a new claim, that is completely incompatible with the prior one. We're taking the old claims that were supposedly evidence-supported, and tossing them in the dumpster. At the very least, this means that overly strong conclusions were drawn from previous experiments. I think it's a mistake to dismiss such situations as the general public being confused about how science works. Undoubtedly many are, but the reason for that is certainly in large part due to the abuse of "scientific" claims about their everyday life.
generalizations 6y ago
> COVID deniers aren't suggesting we don't take vaccines because they are unsure of the effectiveness of vaccines - they are suggesting we don't take vaccines because they are actually microchips by Bill Gates designed to track us. That is misinformation. It is absolutely the case that people are unwilling to take the vaccine because the effectiveness (and safety) is questionable. You're just throwing up a strawman. It's also possible you just don't know the reasoning behind any but the most vocal "covid deniers". That wouldn't be surprising, since the standard practice now seems to be to lump everyone who questions the 'official position' in with the most extreme theories, and that makes rational people shut up. Your generalization is only strengthening your echo chamber.
- nemothekid 6y ago
  >It is absolutely the case that people are unwilling to take the vaccine because the effectiveness (and safety) is questionable. Effectiveness is one thing; I take the same exact reasoning for wearing masks - you take the insurance especially when it costs you nothing. However, you are welcome to enlighten me on well supported arguments against vaccine safety. You can't just tell me that I'm throwing up strawman, then make 0 actual arguments except "I'm not doing enough research". If you are asking me to doubt vaccine safety on no data except some vague claims on there being "less extreme" positions, then I would argue you are spreading misinformation; especially when there are decades of research showing the safety otherwise.
  - generalizations 6y ago
    I think you've completely misunderstood me. I'm not attempting to persuade you of anything. You're misrepresenting the positions of the people who disagree with you. You're making it sound like the only alternative to your position is rediculous. You're throwing up a strawman. Disagree with me; that's fine. But this is my point: be intellectually honest about it, and don't fool yourself into thinking that the people who disagree with you are not well-reasoned.
    - nemothekid 6y ago

joe_91 6y ago

Some good points! I do think that most people are not used to how science can change over time and that what most science is is just what the majority of scientists have come to conclude from their independent studies. Most people have not had to deal with greys and prefer things to be black and white. We need a shift towards understanding that the best available information is better than nothing and that the information can change as more better information comes to light. Another thing we need to move away from is crucifying people for getting things wrong - this just doesn't help in the long run. People are fallible and make mistakes. Granted, don't let them make to many in a row but once in a while needs to be acceptable.

UncleOxidant 6y ago
> most people are not used to how science can change over time We need more education on the scientific method and how it works.
ahepp 6y ago
I think the statement that "science can change over time", though true, is improper to use in most cases. The transition between different models of the atom is a great example of science changing over time. The existing theory explained some things, but not others. The superseding theory explained the previous observations, and made new falsifiable predictions that could not be refuted at the time. The conflicting claims about fats and carbs is an example of that excuse not holding water. We're talking about a new claim, that is completely incompatible with the prior one. We're taking the old claims that were supposedly evidence-supported, and tossing them in the dumpster. At the very least, this means that overly strong conclusions were drawn from previous experiments. I think it's a mistake to dismiss such situations as the general public being confused about how science works. Undoubtedly many are, but the reason for that is certainly in large part due to the abuse of "scientific" claims about their everyday life.

generalizations 6y ago

> COVID deniers aren't suggesting we don't take vaccines because they are unsure of the effectiveness of vaccines - they are suggesting we don't take vaccines because they are actually microchips by Bill Gates designed to track us. That is misinformation. It is absolutely the case that people are unwilling to take the vaccine because the effectiveness (and safety) is questionable. You're just throwing up a strawman. It's also possible you just don't know the reasoning behind any but the most vocal "covid deniers". That wouldn't be surprising, since the standard practice now seems to be to lump everyone who questions the 'official position' in with the most extreme theories, and that makes rational people shut up. Your generalization is only strengthening your echo chamber.

nemothekid 6y ago
>It is absolutely the case that people are unwilling to take the vaccine because the effectiveness (and safety) is questionable. Effectiveness is one thing; I take the same exact reasoning for wearing masks - you take the insurance especially when it costs you nothing. However, you are welcome to enlighten me on well supported arguments against vaccine safety. You can't just tell me that I'm throwing up strawman, then make 0 actual arguments except "I'm not doing enough research". If you are asking me to doubt vaccine safety on no data except some vague claims on there being "less extreme" positions, then I would argue you are spreading misinformation; especially when there are decades of research showing the safety otherwise.
- generalizations 6y ago
  I think you've completely misunderstood me. I'm not attempting to persuade you of anything. You're misrepresenting the positions of the people who disagree with you. You're making it sound like the only alternative to your position is rediculous. You're throwing up a strawman. Disagree with me; that's fine. But this is my point: be intellectually honest about it, and don't fool yourself into thinking that the people who disagree with you are not well-reasoned.
  - nemothekid 6y ago