All this nonsense about the “Experts” and “The Science”.

[PredFan]

Rather that think, many people would rather simply link to “experts” or “follow the science”.

I blame our education system and the teachers and professors for doing a shitty job often intentionally. Young people are no longer taught to think.

If you thought about it at all, you’d realize that there are some significant problems with this.

First of all, science and scientists are fallible, they are human too. If you know history, you will know that sciencehas been wrongmore often than right. Scientists USED to believe that they learned just as much from being wrong as they did from being right.

Another problem is that science is for sale. Give a scientist a job and pay him well and he’ll give you science to say whatever you want. Did you know that the tobacco companies had teams of scientists on their side years ago who would claim that there was no link to health problems from smoking.

Another problem with trusting the science and scientists is that science has been politicized. It’s easy to do. Our institutions of “learning” are run by the left and if you want to keep a job and want to be taken seriously, you toe the line.

The biggest danger in letting someone else think for you is that you can easily be duped. Just trot out a well paid and politically connected “expert” and they can get you to believe anything they want you to.

that’s exactly the goal of education and politics today. Keeping people from thinking for themselves.

Trump has done all your thinking for you for 5 years. I would bet you a buck you can't point to any major difference you've had with Trump where you disagreed with him

Science changes as new facts develop.

No, he hasn’t. That’s just more partisan garbage you like to state because it’s easier for you to do that than to think.

The challenge remains:

" I would bet you a buck you can't point to any major difference you've had with Trump where you disagreed with him "

Put up or shut up.

Not that I have to take seriously anything you demand, but this is too easy to do. I don’t now, nor have I ever, like the way he spends money. He spends like a Democrat. Now that you have been defeated, take your partisan stupidity elsewhere.

Funny you can't cite where you really disagreed with him though over 5 years. You've been quite programmable.

I just did you idiot. Learn to read.

 

[candycorn]

Rather that think, many people would rather simply link to “experts” or “follow the science”.

I blame our education system and the teachers and professors for doing a shitty job often intentionally. Young people are no longer taught to think.

If you thought about it at all, you’d realize that there are some significant problems with this.

First of all, science and scientists are fallible, they are human too. If you know history, you will know that sciencehas been wrongmore often than right. Scientists USED to believe that they learned just as much from being wrong as they did from being right.

Another problem is that science is for sale. Give a scientist a job and pay him well and he’ll give you science to say whatever you want. Did you know that the tobacco companies had teams of scientists on their side years ago who would claim that there was no link to health problems from smoking.

Another problem with trusting the science and scientists is that science has been politicized. It’s easy to do. Our institutions of “learning” are run by the left and if you want to keep a job and want to be taken seriously, you toe the line.

The biggest danger in letting someone else think for you is that you can easily be duped. Just trot out a well paid and politically connected “expert” and they can get you to believe anything they want you to.

that’s exactly the goal of education and politics today. Keeping people from thinking for themselves.

Trump has done all your thinking for you for 5 years. I would bet you a buck you can't point to any major difference you've had with Trump where you disagreed with him

Science changes as new facts develop.

No, he hasn’t. That’s just more partisan garbage you like to state because it’s easier for you to do that than to think.

The challenge remains:

" I would bet you a buck you can't point to any major difference you've had with Trump where you disagreed with him "

Put up or shut up.

Not that I have to take seriously anything you demand, but this is too easy to do. I don’t now, nor have I ever, like the way he spends money. He spends like a Democrat. Now that you have been defeated, take your partisan stupidity elsewhere.

Funny you can't cite where you really disagreed with him though over 5 years. You've been quite programmable.

I just did you idiot. Learn to read.

I asked for a citation. You, of course, can't produce one. You've been Trump's bitch forever.

 

[PredFan]

Rather that think, many people would rather simply link to “experts” or “follow the science”.

I blame our education system and the teachers and professors for doing a shitty job often intentionally. Young people are no longer taught to think.

If you thought about it at all, you’d realize that there are some significant problems with this.

First of all, science and scientists are fallible, they are human too. If you know history, you will know that sciencehas been wrongmore often than right. Scientists USED to believe that they learned just as much from being wrong as they did from being right.

Another problem is that science is for sale. Give a scientist a job and pay him well and he’ll give you science to say whatever you want. Did you know that the tobacco companies had teams of scientists on their side years ago who would claim that there was no link to health problems from smoking.

Another problem with trusting the science and scientists is that science has been politicized. It’s easy to do. Our institutions of “learning” are run by the left and if you want to keep a job and want to be taken seriously, you toe the line.

The biggest danger in letting someone else think for you is that you can easily be duped. Just trot out a well paid and politically connected “expert” and they can get you to believe anything they want you to.

that’s exactly the goal of education and politics today. Keeping people from thinking for themselves.

Trump has done all your thinking for you for 5 years. I would bet you a buck you can't point to any major difference you've had with Trump where you disagreed with him

Science changes as new facts develop.

No, he hasn’t. That’s just more partisan garbage you like to state because it’s easier for you to do that than to think.

The challenge remains:

" I would bet you a buck you can't point to any major difference you've had with Trump where you disagreed with him "

Put up or shut up.

Not that I have to take seriously anything you demand, but this is too easy to do. I don’t now, nor have I ever, like the way he spends money. He spends like a Democrat. Now that you have been defeated, take your partisan stupidity elsewhere.

Funny you can't cite where you really disagreed with him though over 5 years. You've been quite programmable.

I just did you idiot. Learn to read.

I asked for a citation. You, of course, can't produce one. You've been Trump's bitch forever.

You’ve been an illiterate moron forever. I provided all I need to. You are dismissed.

 

[candycorn]

Rather that think, many people would rather simply link to “experts” or “follow the science”.

I blame our education system and the teachers and professors for doing a shitty job often intentionally. Young people are no longer taught to think.

If you thought about it at all, you’d realize that there are some significant problems with this.

First of all, science and scientists are fallible, they are human too. If you know history, you will know that sciencehas been wrongmore often than right. Scientists USED to believe that they learned just as much from being wrong as they did from being right.

Another problem is that science is for sale. Give a scientist a job and pay him well and he’ll give you science to say whatever you want. Did you know that the tobacco companies had teams of scientists on their side years ago who would claim that there was no link to health problems from smoking.

Another problem with trusting the science and scientists is that science has been politicized. It’s easy to do. Our institutions of “learning” are run by the left and if you want to keep a job and want to be taken seriously, you toe the line.

The biggest danger in letting someone else think for you is that you can easily be duped. Just trot out a well paid and politically connected “expert” and they can get you to believe anything they want you to.

that’s exactly the goal of education and politics today. Keeping people from thinking for themselves.

Trump has done all your thinking for you for 5 years. I would bet you a buck you can't point to any major difference you've had with Trump where you disagreed with him

Science changes as new facts develop.

No, he hasn’t. That’s just more partisan garbage you like to state because it’s easier for you to do that than to think.

The challenge remains:

" I would bet you a buck you can't point to any major difference you've had with Trump where you disagreed with him "

Put up or shut up.

Not that I have to take seriously anything you demand, but this is too easy to do. I don’t now, nor have I ever, like the way he spends money. He spends like a Democrat. Now that you have been defeated, take your partisan stupidity elsewhere.

Funny you can't cite where you really disagreed with him though over 5 years. You've been quite programmable.

I just did you idiot. Learn to read.

I asked for a citation. You, of course, can't produce one. You've been Trump's bitch forever.

You’ve been an illiterate moron forever. I provided all I need to. You are dismissed.

Translation: You've never once disagreed with the blob. Thanks for confirming what we always knew.

 

[ReinyDays]

The sad part is most all scientific information is available to the public ... if a claim looks bat-shit crazy ... look it up ... or if you're too lazy, admit you haven't researched the matter ...

I understand taking classes is expensive ... but we can buy textbooks at Goodwill all day long for a buck or two ... learn the basics ...

I have my dog-eared copy of Halliday/Resnick right here by my computer desk ... and yes, I check in it before I post my claims on the internet ... I'm not always right, but geez, I'm generally pretty close ... so many claims on the internet are so easily refuted with just basic principles ... ignorant people spewing nonsensical claims ... "Hypercanes and Hockey Sticks" ... stinks worst than yesterday's diaper ...

As a rule of thumb ... if an "expert" is speaking on commercial media, he's being paid to read from a script ... they're actors, not experts ... if the scientific literature is too thick for you ... spend the buck or two and buy a textbook, learn the basics, read more scientific papers, educate yourself ...

And never ask Wuwei for a citation ... Lord have mercy ... my heart still skips a beat even thinking about that ...

 

[PredFan]

The sad part is most all scientific information is available to the public ... if a claim looks bat-shit crazy ... look it up ... or if you're too lazy, admit you haven't researched the matter ...

I understand taking classes is expensive ... but we can buy textbooks at Goodwill all day long for a buck or two ... learn the basics ...

I have my dog-eared copy of Halliday/Resnick right here by my computer desk ... and yes, I check in it before I post my claims on the internet ... I'm not always right, but geez, I'm generally pretty close ... so many claims on the internet are so easily refuted with just basic principles ... ignorant people spewing nonsensical claims ... "Hypercanes and Hockey Sticks" ... stinks worst than yesterday's diaper ...

As a rule of thumb ... if an "expert" is speaking on commercial media, he's being paid to read from a script ... they're actors, not experts ... if the scientific literature is too thick for you ... spend the buck or two and buy a textbook, learn the basics, read more scientific papers, educate yourself ...

And never ask Wuwei for a citation ... Lord have mercy ... my heart still skips a beat even thinking about that ...

Agreed. Nobody can be expected to learn everything. My point is to be skeptical. Think for yourself. If one "expert" is saying something and it sounds incredible, check it out. If it's a subject that's over you head, check to see if all experts agree. Odds are they won't. Read both sides and decide yourself.

Too many people here simply follow the science and experts that say what they want to hear and ignore anything and anyone who says differently. Then they claim to "follow the science." The are simple minded parrots.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

What I have found is that the less a person is trained in the sciences, the more likely they are to parrot the mantra "listen to the scientists"

I'm especially keen to see the science that says the covid virus is sure you get you if you patronize a small business, but can't touch you if you are shopping at Walmart or Home Depot.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

You don't actually know what you're talking about. I would pay money to watch you try to debate any scientist on their field of expertise. Be sure to have somebody recording so your embarrassment can go viral on Youtube. If you read a scientific study that didn't have a synopsis you would not be able to explain to me what's being said because you're not actually educated in the field.

You don't have so much as one single science credit at the University level, do you?

 

[PredFan]

What I have found is that the less a person is trained in the sciences, the more likely they are to parrot the mantra "listen to the scientists"

I'm especially keen to see the science that says the covid virus is sure you get you if you patronize a small business, but can't touch you if you are shopping at Walmart or Home Depot.

You are probably correct in most cases. They are not just lacking in science knowledge, but in general knowledge as well. They cannot understand how easily it would be for someone to mislead them. they lack critical thinking skills almost completely.

 

[Indeependent]

I always ask my MDs and MDs in my community and the answer remains the same...
No one knows how COVID works.

 

[TheParser]

"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert."

-- David Ben-Gurion, Israeli statesman

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What I have found is that the less a person is trained in the sciences, the more likely they are to parrot the mantra "listen to the scientists"

I'm especially keen to see the science that says the covid virus is sure you get you if you patronize a small business, but can't touch you if you are shopping at Walmart or Home Depot.

Politics causes that, not science or scientists. Scientists would recommend all the stores be closed to foot traffic. But politicians have to account for more than just the pandemic science. They have to manage the economy as well. And since our federal response is a global embarrassment, they have to make tough decisions that seem silly. Like letting people congregate in churches.

 

[LuckyDuck]

Rather that think, many people would rather simply link to “experts” or “follow the science”.

I blame our education system and the teachers and professors for doing a shitty job often intentionally. Young people are no longer taught to think.

If you thought about it at all, you’d realize that there are some significant problems with this.

First of all, science and scientists are fallible, they are human too. If you know history, you will know that sciencehas been wrongmore often than right. Scientists USED to believe that they learned just as much from being wrong as they did from being right.

Another problem is that science is for sale. Give a scientist a job and pay him well and he’ll give you science to say whatever you want. Did you know that the tobacco companies had teams of scientists on their side years ago who would claim that there was no link to health problems from smoking.

Another problem with trusting the science and scientists is that science has been politicized. It’s easy to do. Our institutions of “learning” are run by the left and if you want to keep a job and want to be taken seriously, you toe the line.

The biggest danger in letting someone else think for you is that you can easily be duped. Just trot out a well paid and politically connected “expert” and they can get you to believe anything they want you to.

that’s exactly the goal of education and politics today. Keeping people from thinking for themselves.

If I'm wrong, you can correct me, but is this basically about science only being taught in public schools and not including "intelligent-design?"
If so, as we have many religions here, an "elective/optional" class is acceptable, but not in an actual science class.
When religious parents complain that their religion isn't being taught in public schools, they actually want their religion proselytized towards the other children, for if you say that they should then hear equally about other religions, they refuse that. The public schools are there to teach, as the old saying goes, "the three R's," plus science, history and a few other classes. Religion isn't science and never has been. It's simply a "fill in the gaps, where we don't have all the answers, stance and that isn't science." Only belief.

I don’t understand what intelligent design has to do with this.

Like I said, if my response was wrong, point it out. You pointed it out and that's fine.

 

[PredFan]

For example:
When I was a new Perfusionist, we had to perform a certain procedure on every bypass patient. That was standard practice backed by science.

a while after that a new surgeon showed us many studies that showed that this procedure was unnecessary. We stopped.

last year that surgeon retired and we are now going back to using that procedure again. When asked about it, the current chief surgeon linked us to studies showing that it is necessary.
So, at what point was the “science” right, and when was it wrong? Who really knows?
I have seen this scenario play out in many other situations, each time each step was what the “science” said.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

For example:
When I was a new Perfusionist, we had to perform a certain procedure on every bypass patient. That was standard practice backed by science.

a while after that a new surgeon showed us many studies that showed that this procedure was unnecessary. We stopped.

last year that surgeon retired and we are now going back to using that procedure again. When asked about it, the current chief surgeon linked us to studies showing that it is necessary.
So, at what point was the “science” right, and when was it wrong? Who really knows?
I have seen this scenario play out in many other situations, each time each step was what the “science” said.

But at no point was the vast manority of the body of ideas thrown out. You didnt stop doing bypasses. The fundamental idea remains. What you are describing is akin to modifying the position on a family tree of one fossil. "Upending" previous ideas about that particular fossil hasn't put a dent in the theory of evolution. It remains safe and intact.

 

[PredFan]

For example:
When I was a new Perfusionist, we had to perform a certain procedure on every bypass patient. That was standard practice backed by science.

a while after that a new surgeon showed us many studies that showed that this procedure was unnecessary. We stopped.

last year that surgeon retired and we are now going back to using that procedure again. When asked about it, the current chief surgeon linked us to studies showing that it is necessary.
So, at what point was the “science” right, and when was it wrong? Who really knows?
I have seen this scenario play out in many other situations, each time each step was what the “science” said.

But at no point was the vast manority of the body of ideas thrown out. You didnt stop doing bypasses. The fundamental idea remains. What you are describing is akin to modifying the position on a family tree of one fossil. "Upending" previous ideas about that particular fossil hasn't put a dent in the theory of evolution. It remains safe and intact.

That is not what I said.

A procedure that we did when a patient was on bypass was stopped. The procedure was not part of the fundamental idea of bypass. The “science” at the time claimed it was necessary, then it said it wasn’t necessary, now it says it is. That’s not at all like what you are describing.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

For example:
When I was a new Perfusionist, we had to perform a certain procedure on every bypass patient. That was standard practice backed by science.

a while after that a new surgeon showed us many studies that showed that this procedure was unnecessary. We stopped.

last year that surgeon retired and we are now going back to using that procedure again. When asked about it, the current chief surgeon linked us to studies showing that it is necessary.
So, at what point was the “science” right, and when was it wrong? Who really knows?
I have seen this scenario play out in many other situations, each time each step was what the “science” said.

But at no point was the vast manority of the body of ideas thrown out. You didnt stop doing bypasses. The fundamental idea remains. What you are describing is akin to modifying the position on a family tree of one fossil. "Upending" previous ideas about that particular fossil hasn't put a dent in the theory of evolution. It remains safe and intact.

That is not what I said.

A procedure that we did when a patient was on bypass was stopped. The procedure was not part of the fundamental idea of bypass. The “science” at the time claimed it was necessary, then it said it wasn’t necessary, now it says it is. That’s not at all like what you are describing.

It is precisely what i am describing. While acience will account for new information, you havent made any case for not trusting science, which is obviously what you are dancing around. Trust me...the patients still need bypasses. You are still not connecting their hearts to their colons or their big toes. At no point would you have done anyone a service to reject the science and say it cant be trusted, because it may change. Else you would be virtually paralyzed, unable to treat any patients..

 

[PredFan]

For example:
When I was a new Perfusionist, we had to perform a certain procedure on every bypass patient. That was standard practice backed by science.

a while after that a new surgeon showed us many studies that showed that this procedure was unnecessary. We stopped.

last year that surgeon retired and we are now going back to using that procedure again. When asked about it, the current chief surgeon linked us to studies showing that it is necessary.
So, at what point was the “science” right, and when was it wrong? Who really knows?
I have seen this scenario play out in many other situations, each time each step was what the “science” said.

But at no point was the vast manority of the body of ideas thrown out. You didnt stop doing bypasses. The fundamental idea remains. What you are describing is akin to modifying the position on a family tree of one fossil. "Upending" previous ideas about that particular fossil hasn't put a dent in the theory of evolution. It remains safe and intact.

That is not what I said.

A procedure that we did when a patient was on bypass was stopped. The procedure was not part of the fundamental idea of bypass. The “science” at the time claimed it was necessary, then it said it wasn’t necessary, now it says it is. That’s not at all like what you are describing.

It is precisely what i am describing. While acience will account for new information, you havent made any case for not trusting science, which is obviously what you are dancing around. Trust me...the patients still need bypasses. You are still not connecting their hearts to their colons or their big toes. At no point would you have done anyone a service to reject the science and say it cant be trusted, because it may change. Else you would be virtually paralyzed, unable to treat any patients..

I don’t know where the disconnect is but you seem to be having trouble with it.

If you are trying to say not to throw the baby out with the bath water, that’s not at all what I’m describing.

People are constantly saying “Listen to the science”, and I’m cautioning people. Science historically has been wrong more often than right.

If we use mask wearing as an example, I’m not calling the epidemic a hoax because I can prove masks don’t work.

All I’m saying is putting all your trust in science and experts without being at least a little skeptical is the wrong way to look at things.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

For example:
When I was a new Perfusionist, we had to perform a certain procedure on every bypass patient. That was standard practice backed by science.

a while after that a new surgeon showed us many studies that showed that this procedure was unnecessary. We stopped.

last year that surgeon retired and we are now going back to using that procedure again. When asked about it, the current chief surgeon linked us to studies showing that it is necessary.
So, at what point was the “science” right, and when was it wrong? Who really knows?
I have seen this scenario play out in many other situations, each time each step was what the “science” said.

But at no point was the vast manority of the body of ideas thrown out. You didnt stop doing bypasses. The fundamental idea remains. What you are describing is akin to modifying the position on a family tree of one fossil. "Upending" previous ideas about that particular fossil hasn't put a dent in the theory of evolution. It remains safe and intact.

That is not what I said.

A procedure that we did when a patient was on bypass was stopped. The procedure was not part of the fundamental idea of bypass. The “science” at the time claimed it was necessary, then it said it wasn’t necessary, now it says it is. That’s not at all like what you are describing.

It is precisely what i am describing. While acience will account for new information, you havent made any case for not trusting science, which is obviously what you are dancing around. Trust me...the patients still need bypasses. You are still not connecting their hearts to their colons or their big toes. At no point would you have done anyone a service to reject the science and say it cant be trusted, because it may change. Else you would be virtually paralyzed, unable to treat any patients..

I don’t know where the disconnect is but you seem to be having trouble with it.

If you are trying to say not to throw the baby out with the bath water, that’s not at all what I’m describing.

People are constantly saying “Listen to the science”, and I’m cautioning people. Science historically has been wrong more often than right.

If we use mask wearing as an example, I’m not calling the epidemic a hoax because I can prove masks don’t work.

All I’m saying is putting all your trust in science and experts without being at least a little skeptical is the wrong way to look at things.

You are cautioning people? For what reason? So you think you shoild have ignored thevtreatment directives for the bypass surgery? Which one? How would you know which one? To perform the procedure or not?

Which one? What benefit would "caution" have brought you, in your scenario? I don't see any.

 

[PredFan]

For example:
When I was a new Perfusionist, we had to perform a certain procedure on every bypass patient. That was standard practice backed by science.

a while after that a new surgeon showed us many studies that showed that this procedure was unnecessary. We stopped.

last year that surgeon retired and we are now going back to using that procedure again. When asked about it, the current chief surgeon linked us to studies showing that it is necessary.
So, at what point was the “science” right, and when was it wrong? Who really knows?
I have seen this scenario play out in many other situations, each time each step was what the “science” said.

But at no point was the vast manority of the body of ideas thrown out. You didnt stop doing bypasses. The fundamental idea remains. What you are describing is akin to modifying the position on a family tree of one fossil. "Upending" previous ideas about that particular fossil hasn't put a dent in the theory of evolution. It remains safe and intact.

That is not what I said.

A procedure that we did when a patient was on bypass was stopped. The procedure was not part of the fundamental idea of bypass. The “science” at the time claimed it was necessary, then it said it wasn’t necessary, now it says it is. That’s not at all like what you are describing.

It is precisely what i am describing. While acience will account for new information, you havent made any case for not trusting science, which is obviously what you are dancing around. Trust me...the patients still need bypasses. You are still not connecting their hearts to their colons or their big toes. At no point would you have done anyone a service to reject the science and say it cant be trusted, because it may change. Else you would be virtually paralyzed, unable to treat any patients..

I don’t know where the disconnect is but you seem to be having trouble with it.

If you are trying to say not to throw the baby out with the bath water, that’s not at all what I’m describing.

People are constantly saying “Listen to the science”, and I’m cautioning people. Science historically has been wrong more often than right.

If we use mask wearing as an example, I’m not calling the epidemic a hoax because I can prove masks don’t work.

All I’m saying is putting all your trust in science and experts without being at least a little skeptical is the wrong way to look at things.

You are cautioning people? For what reason? So you think you shoild have ignored thevtreatment directives for the bypass surgery? Which one? How would you know which one? To perform the procedure or not?

Which one? What benefit would "caution" have brought you, in your scenario? I don't see any.

The tale was to show that science is often wrong. In that case, it really didn’t seem to make a significant difference as long as you don’t factor in the cost.

You are right, to this day I personally don’t think the procedure is necessary but it’s again policy and I must do it. The only point of the tale is to show how science and experts can be wrong.