4 ms·
> for the rest of us we generally have to trust what we read or the experts that we pay for their assessments. Rest assured, I'm in with you in the rest of us.
by pif 3y ago
> for the rest of us we generally have to trust what we read or the experts that we pay for their assessments.
Rest assured, I'm in with you in the rest of us. As you said, we have to trust the experts: that's why we pay them!
I do concede that, concerning climate change, too many articles and reports switch perniciously from science to politics, with no warning. E.g. "Global temperature are rising [science], and fossil fuels are a big part of it [science], thus we have to cut off fossil fuels [politics]".
Now, if you decide to fight for your petrol guzzling pickup that you objectively don't need, I'm not sure I'll side with you, but I'll get your point. And if you insist on flying on your holidays instead of going to the local pons, I'll get your point again. In general, I'll side with you that people at large must have the last word on what actions to take and which part of comfort to give up.
But you don't believe in global warming, and you don't believe in the role of fossil fuels: those are facts, this is what experts have been screaming for decades. If you don't feel your daily life reflects what experts are saying, you are welcome to ask for help in understanding what you are getting wrong. But you don't put your limited experience over the enormous corpus of studies that have been performed for decades all around the world: that would be idiot!
- legitster 3y agoI really appreciate this angle, but I have a few counter-arguments: - The ongoing replication crisis has shown that experts and entire areas of study can be completely wrong for a long periods of time. People are rightfully distrustful when economists put out a "model", so it shouldn't be so crazy to expect natural skepticism elsewhere.( I don't think that applies to climate change - you should be able to look with your own eyes and see that it's real. ) - There are actually several distinct arguments people have to accept for climate change: 1) It's really happening 2) It's caused by greenhouse gases 3) It's man-made 4) There are bad consequences 5) There are achievable solutions. People are often expected to "buy in" to all of these arguments at once, but some experts do not even buy into all 5! - At this cultural moment, facts do not matter. Or they only matter when "our side" wants them to. This is true for climate, but it's also true for other topics like gender, diet, economics, guns, nuclear power, etc. There are a lot of areas where people willfully ignore or set aside "facts". So it should be no surprise this one gets treated the same way. I myself do not live my life according to the best paid experts - I drink, I eat red meat, I listen to music too loud, I stay up to late. So I will act with a touch of grace when other people don't listen either.