5 ms·

> I have to tell my parents to stop reading As a researcher myself, I really dislike that this is even a thing. I constantly have friends send me articles ask

> I have to tell my parents to stop reading As a researcher myself, I really dislike that this is even a thing. I constantly have friends send me articles asking what I think about things (frequently the answer is "I have no idea" and/or "the paper says something different"). I'm livid about this because this erodes public trust in science. Worse, people don't see that connection... I don't understand how major news publications can't be bothered to actually reach out to authors. Or how universities themselves will do that and embellish work. I get that it's "only a little" embellishment, but it's not a slippery slope considering how often we see that compound (and how it is an excuse rather than acting in good faith). The truth is that the public does not understand the difference in the confidence levels of scientists for things like "anthropomorphic climate change" vs "drinking wine and eating chocolate is healthy for you." To them, it's just "scientists" who are some conglomerate. It is so pervasive that I can talk to my parents about something things I have domain expertise and written papers on and they believe scientists are making tons of money over this while I was struggling with student debt. I have to explain when I worked at a national lab isn't full of rich people[0]. There's a lot of easier ways to make money... And my parents, each, made more than any of the scientists I knew... [0] People I know that have jumped ship and moved from lab to industry 2x-3x their salary (these are people with PhDs btw). https://www.levels.fyi/companies/oak-ridge-national-laboratory/salaries/software-engineer https://www.levels.fyi/companies/oak-ridge-national-laborato... https://www.levels.fyi/companies/lawrence-livermore-national-laboratory/salaries/software-engineer https://www.levels.fyi/companies/lawrence-livermore-national... [Side note]: I wish we were able to be more honest in papers too. But I have lots of issues with the review system and the biggest is probably that no one wants to actually make any meaningful changes despite constant failure in the process and widespread frustration.

istjohn 2y ago
Yes. My dad cites the vaccilation of the science on whether or not eggs are healthy as the reason he places no trust in what scientists say. Of course, he is mistaking science reporting for the science itself, but he should be able to trust the media to accurately communicate the scientific consensus. It's one thing when we're talking about eggs or chocolate, but now he's skeptical of science reporting on global warming and COVID-19. And is that unreasonable? Why should he put a high credence in any science reporting going forward? He's a construction worker. He's not equiped to go read the journal articles for himself. Of course, we haven't even touched on the replication crisis, of which thankfully my dad is blissfully unaware.
- godelski 2y ago
  A funny one was I was visiting my parents for the holidays. They have the news on and it is talking about that $2T funding cuts. It shows a bunch of examples with like $50m to this, $500k to that, and then a random $10k to "youth break dancing." And I'm like "why is that there? Seems like rage bait. Why not list more big ticket items? It's $2T, $10k is a nothing at that scale." You guessed right, this started a fight. I wasn't even trying to say that the thing should be funded (though I have no issues. Sounds like just a recreational program. Who cares? It's not even "pennies"). A lesson I continually fail to learn is that it isn't about the actual things. Information is a weapon to many people. Not a thing to chase, to uncover, to discover, but a thing that is concrete and certain. I still fear the man that "knows", since all I can be certain of is that he knows nothing.
  - madmask 2y ago
    Yes it can be hard to convey numbers to the general public. Orders of magnitude are unintuitive unless STEM trained.
    - godelski 2y ago
      I'm not sure that's even enough. I have a physics degree and all I've learned is that my stupid brain can't understand those numbers except through equations and relations. I think this is the best you can get. Money is also very weird since it compounds. Both large wealth and government money are completely different classes, as well as different from each other. People try to think of both those versions of money in relation to how they use money themselves. Which just leads to misunderstandings.
  - bavell 2y ago
    Sounds to me like you were focusing on the (negligible) impact, while they were upset on principle?
    - godelski 2y ago
      Correct. But it was impossible to convince them that the premise of the complaint was different from what they wanted to hear. Tribalism makes people want to fight.
BlueTemplar 2y ago
Classic https://phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174 https://phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174
krisoft 2y ago
> The truth is that the public does not understand the difference in the confidence levels of scientists for things like "anthropomorphic climate change" vs "drinking wine and eating chocolate is healthy for you." The problem is that without science and stem foundations it is very hard for people to even understand what is and isn’t known. My mum used to send me all kind of articles about chakras. “there are kids born now who have their sixth chakra open” and “this chakra is orange, and that chakra is indigo”. One day my mom, my then girlfriend, and me were chatting about what specialisation my girlfriend is thinking about pursuing at medical school. She told her that she is thinking about specialising in endocrinology. My mom become really angry and cided us for using such “big words” to “lord our education over her”. So to placate her we explained that it is a doctor who studies hormones, measures hormone levels and treats diseases of the hormone system. She got visibly surprised and the only things she asked “you can measure hormones?” The conversation continued of course but that question, and the genuine surprise on her face remained with me. The thing is, she trully did not know that we can measure hormones. And if you don’t know that hormones are as real as the legs of the table, and chakras are as real as santa claus, then they both sound equally plausible theories about health. And when you race the stories against each other “i’m not feeling well because my heart chakra is blocked, and I need healing crystals and massages to get well again” vs “i’m not feeling well because my thyroid gland is not producing enough thyroxine, and i need to take suplements in a pill form” then the first one wins because it is simpler and neater sounding. But one is kinda bulshit and the other is a real thing. But you won’t know that unless you understand that we can measure hormones, and nobody even has any idea what it would mean to measure a chakra.
- dinkumthinkum 2y ago
  Ok, but you make it sounds like the vast majority of people are under such impressions. A lot of people in this thread imply that having a STEM degree confers god-like insight over the plebes that don't have one; I think it is a bit of ironic arrogance. For instance, this thing about the "confidence levels of scientists" for climate change; there is a well-known issue with this myth of a "97% consensus" on that topic. As well, many people think critics of "climate policies" are rubes that "don't know teh science stuff" but actually most do accept humans have contributed to some climate change (but don't agree to the extent that lefts claim when they say migrants come to the US because of it) but rather they disagree about what to do about it.

istjohn 2y ago

Yes. My dad cites the vaccilation of the science on whether or not eggs are healthy as the reason he places no trust in what scientists say. Of course, he is mistaking science reporting for the science itself, but he should be able to trust the media to accurately communicate the scientific consensus. It's one thing when we're talking about eggs or chocolate, but now he's skeptical of science reporting on global warming and COVID-19. And is that unreasonable? Why should he put a high credence in any science reporting going forward? He's a construction worker. He's not equiped to go read the journal articles for himself. Of course, we haven't even touched on the replication crisis, of which thankfully my dad is blissfully unaware.

godelski 2y ago
A funny one was I was visiting my parents for the holidays. They have the news on and it is talking about that $2T funding cuts. It shows a bunch of examples with like $50m to this, $500k to that, and then a random $10k to "youth break dancing." And I'm like "why is that there? Seems like rage bait. Why not list more big ticket items? It's $2T, $10k is a nothing at that scale." You guessed right, this started a fight. I wasn't even trying to say that the thing should be funded (though I have no issues. Sounds like just a recreational program. Who cares? It's not even "pennies"). A lesson I continually fail to learn is that it isn't about the actual things. Information is a weapon to many people. Not a thing to chase, to uncover, to discover, but a thing that is concrete and certain. I still fear the man that "knows", since all I can be certain of is that he knows nothing.
- madmask 2y ago
  Yes it can be hard to convey numbers to the general public. Orders of magnitude are unintuitive unless STEM trained.
  - godelski 2y ago
    I'm not sure that's even enough. I have a physics degree and all I've learned is that my stupid brain can't understand those numbers except through equations and relations. I think this is the best you can get. Money is also very weird since it compounds. Both large wealth and government money are completely different classes, as well as different from each other. People try to think of both those versions of money in relation to how they use money themselves. Which just leads to misunderstandings.
- bavell 2y ago
  Sounds to me like you were focusing on the (negligible) impact, while they were upset on principle?
  - godelski 2y ago
    Correct. But it was impossible to convince them that the premise of the complaint was different from what they wanted to hear. Tribalism makes people want to fight.

BlueTemplar 2y ago

Classic https://phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174 https://phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1174

krisoft 2y ago

> The truth is that the public does not understand the difference in the confidence levels of scientists for things like "anthropomorphic climate change" vs "drinking wine and eating chocolate is healthy for you." The problem is that without science and stem foundations it is very hard for people to even understand what is and isn’t known. My mum used to send me all kind of articles about chakras. “there are kids born now who have their sixth chakra open” and “this chakra is orange, and that chakra is indigo”. One day my mom, my then girlfriend, and me were chatting about what specialisation my girlfriend is thinking about pursuing at medical school. She told her that she is thinking about specialising in endocrinology. My mom become really angry and cided us for using such “big words” to “lord our education over her”. So to placate her we explained that it is a doctor who studies hormones, measures hormone levels and treats diseases of the hormone system. She got visibly surprised and the only things she asked “you can measure hormones?” The conversation continued of course but that question, and the genuine surprise on her face remained with me. The thing is, she trully did not know that we can measure hormones. And if you don’t know that hormones are as real as the legs of the table, and chakras are as real as santa claus, then they both sound equally plausible theories about health. And when you race the stories against each other “i’m not feeling well because my heart chakra is blocked, and I need healing crystals and massages to get well again” vs “i’m not feeling well because my thyroid gland is not producing enough thyroxine, and i need to take suplements in a pill form” then the first one wins because it is simpler and neater sounding. But one is kinda bulshit and the other is a real thing. But you won’t know that unless you understand that we can measure hormones, and nobody even has any idea what it would mean to measure a chakra.

dinkumthinkum 2y ago
Ok, but you make it sounds like the vast majority of people are under such impressions. A lot of people in this thread imply that having a STEM degree confers god-like insight over the plebes that don't have one; I think it is a bit of ironic arrogance. For instance, this thing about the "confidence levels of scientists" for climate change; there is a well-known issue with this myth of a "97% consensus" on that topic. As well, many people think critics of "climate policies" are rubes that "don't know teh science stuff" but actually most do accept humans have contributed to some climate change (but don't agree to the extent that lefts claim when they say migrants come to the US because of it) but rather they disagree about what to do about it.