4 ms·

I think this is also a root of science denialism (e.g. anti-vaxxers). I have some antivax family, and the root of their opinion is that the scientists changed

by gumby 3y ago

I think this is also a root of science denialism (e.g. anti-vaxxers). I have some antivax family, and the root of their opinion is that the scientists changed their advice as the pandemic developed! My theory is that in primary and high schools, science is taught as a series of immutable "facts". You get tested on remembering them, and when you do an "experiment" you get marked down if your reading of the litmus paper isn't 4. No sense of doubt, and no exposure to the epistemic boundaries to controleld trials, measurements, etc. If your takeaway is that scientists uncover and explain immutable facts, hearing them say one thing in January and another in June can in fact shake your beliefs in these scientists.

dboreham 3y ago
Doubtful it was anything so logical. Humans like to believe magic, and are very easy to manipulate.
enjeyw 3y ago
In highschool I was lucky enough to join a program run by the CSIRO (Australia's Government funded scientific research body), where students would assist scientists on experiments they were conducting. I was tasked with measuring the water resistance of a proposed environmentally friendly paper coating. I asked my supervising scientist what numbers I should expect to get back from the experiment. I distinctly remember my surprise and thrill when he looked at me and said "I have no idea, that's why you're running the experiment". It was such a new concept to me! A scientific experiment where the correct answer wasn't written in a teacher's lesson guide, or even known to anyone!
bratgpttamer 3y ago
This has been my experience, too, as well as people who understood The Science perfectly and that the authorities were just taking a best guess early on, which set them further against any kind of mandate. (Mostly older, conservative physicians with an "it'll be fine" attitude) The Science didn't change that much (viz: masks in healthcare since forever), but the flip-flopping with messages ("don't horde masks; they won't save you!", "wait, no - everyone needs a mask!"), which was really less about The Science than about different concerns (mask effectiveness, availability) were just the "I told you so" they were looking for.
- CrazyPyroLinux 3y ago
  > scientists changed their advice as the pandemic developed "Changing advice" is to be expected, but it was the outright lying, as proven by FOIA'd emails, which understandably shook faith.
ignorethefacts 3y ago
That's a bad take. The science mouthpieces (aka media and government speaking on behalf of scientists) were insisting they knew the immutable facts and any questions or doubt in those immutable facts were heretical. Anyone who has an appreciation of the evolving nature of scientific research should immediately see the red flags in that. "Antivax" is not a position of anti-science, it's a slanderous label for an alternative theory with its own compelling evidence.
- CrazyPyroLinux 3y ago
  Especially when dishonestly applied to so many people who had all their other shots and maybe some extras, but just weren't on board with this one brand new one.

by gumby 3y ago

dboreham 3y ago

Doubtful it was anything so logical. Humans like to believe magic, and are very easy to manipulate.

enjeyw 3y ago

In highschool I was lucky enough to join a program run by the CSIRO (Australia's Government funded scientific research body), where students would assist scientists on experiments they were conducting. I was tasked with measuring the water resistance of a proposed environmentally friendly paper coating. I asked my supervising scientist what numbers I should expect to get back from the experiment. I distinctly remember my surprise and thrill when he looked at me and said "I have no idea, that's why you're running the experiment". It was such a new concept to me! A scientific experiment where the correct answer wasn't written in a teacher's lesson guide, or even known to anyone!

bratgpttamer 3y ago

This has been my experience, too, as well as people who understood The Science perfectly and that the authorities were just taking a best guess early on, which set them further against any kind of mandate. (Mostly older, conservative physicians with an "it'll be fine" attitude) The Science didn't change that much (viz: masks in healthcare since forever), but the flip-flopping with messages ("don't horde masks; they won't save you!", "wait, no - everyone needs a mask!"), which was really less about The Science than about different concerns (mask effectiveness, availability) were just the "I told you so" they were looking for.

CrazyPyroLinux 3y ago
> scientists changed their advice as the pandemic developed "Changing advice" is to be expected, but it was the outright lying, as proven by FOIA'd emails, which understandably shook faith.

ignorethefacts 3y ago

That's a bad take. The science mouthpieces (aka media and government speaking on behalf of scientists) were insisting they knew the immutable facts and any questions or doubt in those immutable facts were heretical. Anyone who has an appreciation of the evolving nature of scientific research should immediately see the red flags in that. "Antivax" is not a position of anti-science, it's a slanderous label for an alternative theory with its own compelling evidence.

CrazyPyroLinux 3y ago
Especially when dishonestly applied to so many people who had all their other shots and maybe some extras, but just weren't on board with this one brand new one.