3 ms·
The part where people disagree seems fun. Im looking forwards to protoscience/unconventional science and perhaps even that what is worthy of the fringe or pseu
by theendisney 2y ago
The part where people disagree seems fun.
Im looking forwards to protoscience/unconventional science and perhaps even that what is worthy of the fringe or pseudoscience labels. The debunking there usually fails to adress the topic as it is incredibly hard to spend even a single day reading about something you "know" to be nonsense. Who has time for that?
If you take a hundred thousand such topics the odds they should all be dismissed without looking arent very good.
- mrandish 2y ago> The part where people disagree seems fun. Apparently, you haven't been on that Internet thingie in the last five years or so... :-) But I do agree with your point. What's interesting is the increasing number of people who act like there's some clearly objective and knowable truth about a much a larger percentage of topics than there actually is. Outside of mathematics, logic, physics and other hard sciences, the range of topics on which informed, reasonable people can disagree, at least on certain significant aspects, is vast. That's why even the concept of having some army of "Fact Checkers" always struck me as bizarre and doomed at best, and at worst, a transparent attempt to censor and control public discourse. That more people didn't see even the idea of it as being obviously brittle is concerning.
- theendisney 2y agoOn Wikipedia you are suppose to quote the different perspectives. No one has ever accomplished this. We can trust altman and elon to weed out the "fakenews". Finally we will get the answer which is the greatest linux distro. > Outside of mathematics, logic, physics No need to go outside. There are plenty of Grigori Perelmans with various levels of credibility.