4 ms·
a) there's a big prominent link at the top to the author's blog with her credentials b) "The effect is small and I'm not convinced" is not a reason to doubt th
by ineptech 5y ago
a) there's a big prominent link at the top to the author's blog with her credentials
b) "The effect is small and I'm not convinced" is not a reason to doubt the conclusion, it is the conclusion
c) "I don't like the website that posted it" is a pretty lousy reason to dismiss something
- the_af 5y ago> c) "I don't like the website that posted it" It's not the only reason, but it is definitely one. It's part of a kind of "baloney detection kit", inspired by Carl Sagan; or something like the Crackpot Index. You should of course assess claims made by people in circles and websites frequented by cranks, but bear in mind mostly cranks post in those websites. Likewise, if you read claims in websites where UFO conspiracy theories often post, you may find a nugget of truth, but it'd be healthy to keep a strong dose of skepticism. Reasonable people don't post in UFO conspiracy sites; likewise with LessWrong.
- ineptech 5y agoFirst of all, I know a lot of people disagree with lesswrong's consensus opinions on some contentious topics, but comparing it to a UFO site is a stretch. Second, when you dislike a website but see an essay hosted on it get highly upvoted, the skeptical thing to do is to update your opinion of the site, not maintain it despite new evidence to the contrary.