3 ms·

It’s accurate. If you have a better description for the observed phenomena, I’m all ears.

VikingCoder 4y ago
I presented graphs to a friend, and he asserted the data had been faked. His belief that the process is corrupted supersedes any other evidence I could give him. His description of the observed phenomena is a perfect trap, preventing any revisions. He's not the only one I've had this discussion with. One person questioned my ability to understand science, asserting, "Yes, smallpox disappeared about the same time as the smallpox vaccine, but correlation doesn't equal causation." She is convinced that smallpox was faked, and that the vaccine was one of many devices meant to teach us to obey governmental authoritarianism. You tell me, how could I possibly break through to her? She is 100% convinced she has the best description for the observed phenomena. And you know what? That's fine. It's fine that you're also a skeptic. I don't need everyone to adhere to the church of scientific instutitions. But as a society, I think our representatives would be fools to think they have a better instrument to observe the world, than through the lenses of the scientific institutions. Use their own brains to interpret the data, and to decide how to behave, of course. But to provide them with the best theory that fits the observed data. Watching someone in Congress assert that oceans are rising because soil is eroding into the oceans... I mean... It's heartbreaking. [1] [1] : https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/20/opinions/erosion-sea-level-rise-scientific-analysis-lincoln/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/20/opinions/erosion-sea-level-ri...
SantalBlush 4y ago
>If you have a better description for the observed phenomena, I’m all ears. I actually don't believe you are. Using the term "religious ideology" is laughably dishonest.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

I presented graphs to a friend, and he asserted the data had been faked. His belief that the process is corrupted supersedes any other evidence I could give him. His description of the observed phenomena is a perfect trap, preventing any revisions. He's not the only one I've had this discussion with. One person questioned my ability to understand science, asserting, "Yes, smallpox disappeared about the same time as the smallpox vaccine, but correlation doesn't equal causation." She is convinced that smallpox was faked, and that the vaccine was one of many devices meant to teach us to obey governmental authoritarianism. You tell me, how could I possibly break through to her? She is 100% convinced she has the best description for the observed phenomena. And you know what? That's fine. It's fine that you're also a skeptic. I don't need everyone to adhere to the church of scientific instutitions. But as a society, I think our representatives would be fools to think they have a better instrument to observe the world, than through the lenses of the scientific institutions. Use their own brains to interpret the data, and to decide how to behave, of course. But to provide them with the best theory that fits the observed data. Watching someone in Congress assert that oceans are rising because soil is eroding into the oceans... I mean... It's heartbreaking. [1] [1] : https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/20/opinions/erosion-sea-level-rise-scientific-analysis-lincoln/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/20/opinions/erosion-sea-level-ri...

SantalBlush 4y ago

>If you have a better description for the observed phenomena, I’m all ears. I actually don't believe you are. Using the term "religious ideology" is laughably dishonest.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]