4 ms·

"way way behind" and "pretty bleak" are completely subjective and thus meaningless for trying to understand nature. If you can't quantify it, you're only able t

"way way behind" and "pretty bleak" are completely subjective and thus meaningless for trying to understand nature. If you can't quantify it, you're only able to think using feelings and feelings can't tell you important answers like what we should do. They can make you believe you know what we should do, but you'll be wrong because your feelings won't be accurately tuned to the reality.

gbrown 6y ago
Congratulations, you've discovered that I'm commenting on an internet forum rather than submitting something for publication. My assessment is based on my own reading, and on being involved in conservation efforts and trying to stay educated generally. Sorry I didn't prepare a set of bullet points for you, and instead went with an informal an easily intelligible lay summary. To the best of my knowledge, my language (while imprecise) is completely and totally uncontroversial in the scientific community.
- exporectomy 6y ago
  It's not an easily intelligible lay summary because the meaning could be anything. It only conveys emotion, not knowledge about nature. I suppose you're being an activist trying to convert people to your religion of doom. In that case, you do need to convey emotions like fear to fool people into imagining things are unboundedly bad. Quantitative predictions put a cap on how bad it is so they're not as scary as the unknown.
  - gbrown 6y ago
    Are you seriously suggesting that every mention of a negative issue needs to be a self contained and cited polemic piece? Stop being absurd. If you want to talk specifics, make a specific objection, or at least narrow in on an issue you want to get into in more depth.
    - TedDoesntTalk 6y ago
      Sometimes it's better not to respond, gbrown.
      - gbrown 6y ago
        You’re probably right.
  - monkeydreams 6y ago
    "I'm sorry Ms Smith but you have a tumour. The good news is that it is completely operable - at the moment. The bad news, well, until we can measure every conceivable metric relating to this tumour, and unless we can determine every conceivable path its progression might take, we are very reluctant to operate. We have chosen, instead, to wait until the outcome of this cancer is more certain and, having weighed these against the small but measurable risks of surgery, that we are comfortable that we are certain of the benefit surgery will provide." "And when will that be?" "Well, not to beat around the bush, but when the cancer has metastisized and is about to kill you, we will be certain enough of the benefit of surgery now. Yes, this will likely result in your death, but to move before we have solidified all of these variables to a five-sigma measure would be allowing too much emotion into our descision making."
ehershey 6y ago
I found the “subjective” comment easier to understand than this one. Not every opinion or generalization requires citation. Your stance and reply are also subjective. I do prefer quantitative data and references, especially when the topic is at all scientific. It doesn’t automatically make qualitative or broad statements pointless though. It especially doesn’t mean they don’t contribute to understanding.
- exporectomy 6y ago
  Sure, but the internet is awash with similar activist opinions when it comes to climate change, biodiversity, and sustainability. They go in circles reinforcing each other without being grounded in reality. Their aim seems to be to mislead people with fear instead of sharing understanding. I think that underhandedness is what grates on me when I read them.

gbrown 6y ago

Congratulations, you've discovered that I'm commenting on an internet forum rather than submitting something for publication. My assessment is based on my own reading, and on being involved in conservation efforts and trying to stay educated generally. Sorry I didn't prepare a set of bullet points for you, and instead went with an informal an easily intelligible lay summary. To the best of my knowledge, my language (while imprecise) is completely and totally uncontroversial in the scientific community.

exporectomy 6y ago
It's not an easily intelligible lay summary because the meaning could be anything. It only conveys emotion, not knowledge about nature. I suppose you're being an activist trying to convert people to your religion of doom. In that case, you do need to convey emotions like fear to fool people into imagining things are unboundedly bad. Quantitative predictions put a cap on how bad it is so they're not as scary as the unknown.
- gbrown 6y ago
  Are you seriously suggesting that every mention of a negative issue needs to be a self contained and cited polemic piece? Stop being absurd. If you want to talk specifics, make a specific objection, or at least narrow in on an issue you want to get into in more depth.
  - TedDoesntTalk 6y ago
    Sometimes it's better not to respond, gbrown.
    - gbrown 6y ago
      You’re probably right.
- monkeydreams 6y ago
  "I'm sorry Ms Smith but you have a tumour. The good news is that it is completely operable - at the moment. The bad news, well, until we can measure every conceivable metric relating to this tumour, and unless we can determine every conceivable path its progression might take, we are very reluctant to operate. We have chosen, instead, to wait until the outcome of this cancer is more certain and, having weighed these against the small but measurable risks of surgery, that we are comfortable that we are certain of the benefit surgery will provide." "And when will that be?" "Well, not to beat around the bush, but when the cancer has metastisized and is about to kill you, we will be certain enough of the benefit of surgery now. Yes, this will likely result in your death, but to move before we have solidified all of these variables to a five-sigma measure would be allowing too much emotion into our descision making."

ehershey 6y ago

I found the “subjective” comment easier to understand than this one. Not every opinion or generalization requires citation. Your stance and reply are also subjective. I do prefer quantitative data and references, especially when the topic is at all scientific. It doesn’t automatically make qualitative or broad statements pointless though. It especially doesn’t mean they don’t contribute to understanding.

exporectomy 6y ago
Sure, but the internet is awash with similar activist opinions when it comes to climate change, biodiversity, and sustainability. They go in circles reinforcing each other without being grounded in reality. Their aim seems to be to mislead people with fear instead of sharing understanding. I think that underhandedness is what grates on me when I read them.