tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8198390912401056862.post5291171731942427963..comments2023-10-14T06:19:18.000-05:00Comments on Rocket Scientist: RS Classic: Dissing ScienceStephanie Barrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17772217449161603561noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8198390912401056862.post-82963290106165370292010-06-19T12:58:38.658-05:002010-06-19T12:58:38.658-05:00The corollary to the quack's antipathy to real...The corollary to the quack's antipathy to real science is their tendency to use it to their advantage. (Think the way homeopathy and new age gurus like to refer to mysterious quantum effects).<br /><br />To do this, they need an audience that is somewhat better educated than ignorant (ie, they have to know what quantum is), but that does not understand it enough to know that they are being duped.<br /><br />Unfortunately, as science becomes more and more subspecialized and difficult to understand, that potential audience for quackery grows exponentially. <br /><br />I can't tell you how many doctors rail about the anti-vaccine movement or homeopathy, but fall for conspiracy theories and anti-global warming propaganda hook, line and sinker.<br /><br />It's impossible to be an expert in everything. The defense against charlatanry lies in developing critical thinking skills--healthy doses of skepticism, followed by the ability to judge source material for accuracy/credibility, and the ability to find the required source material to determine its accuracy/credibility. <br /><br />In other words--you have to know where to look and what you're looking for. <br /><br />If you haven't seen it, and everyone should, Brian Denning has a great video available free on the web called "Here Be Dragons" (http://herebedragonsmovie.com/); and there's also Michael Shermer's excellent "Baloney Detection Kit" (http://www.michaelshermer.com/2009/06/baloney-detection-kit/).<br /><br />These should be required viewing for every human, young and old, and certainly every teenager, once a year, just to reinforce the point.The Motherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15157821003454766570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8198390912401056862.post-50448231891252126882010-06-19T12:22:24.209-05:002010-06-19T12:22:24.209-05:00Bear in mind that ignorance does not equate with s...Bear in mind that ignorance does not equate with stupidity, unless one refuses to learn. Studied ignorance is the bane of all thinking people. But ignorance, no one is immune. All of us have areas of expertise and areas of ignorance. <br /><br />It's how one reacts to the areas of ignorance that (suspicion vs. curiosity) that says the most about your ability to think critically. Those that make their living off the ignorance of others do their best to promote that suspicion rather than foster the curiosity. That's a red flag, in my book, on how good their data is. People good data, don't want an ignorant audience.Stephanie Barrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17772217449161603561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8198390912401056862.post-75376535087570217902010-06-19T12:18:21.698-05:002010-06-19T12:18:21.698-05:00Jeff, I appreciate your comment because you highli...Jeff, I appreciate your comment because you highlight the problem: the perception of how science works instead of the actuality.<br /><br />As scientists, we don't understand why people are so set on misunderstanding our processes or accusing us of collusion. We know the checks and balances we built into the system specifically so that <i>can't</i> happen (or at least not easily).<br /><br />Any time you hear someone "reputable" saying different, do some digging on the source. You'll find (as the Mother said) quacks promoting miracle nutrients products, people who profit largely be the status quo (rather than the scientific breakthroughs or information), or people who make their living from the manipulation of the specious. <br /><br />If they make their money on talk radio/ televangelism/ speaking engagements where they use emotionalism rather than facts to persuade, chances are they need a gullible following to stay in business (and that means stifling critical thinking).<br /><br />The cigarette industry has colluded to addict and kill untold thousands, if not millions, by blowing smoke at the facts that have been known for decades, breeding doubt by focusing on insignificant details instead of the overall facts. <br /><br />Big oil's doing that now. Follow the money on those screaming the loudest. Believe me, you won't find scientists at the end but vested interests.Stephanie Barrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17772217449161603561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8198390912401056862.post-72876283171608806962010-06-19T11:59:59.648-05:002010-06-19T11:59:59.648-05:00My biggest problem with science is that it’s held ...My biggest problem with science is that it’s held together by territories, hypotheses and conjecture diluted with data… now I know it has produce a ton of wonderful things and it is necessary for our future development as a society.<br /><br />I just am stating what the problem is to me. Very seldom fact don’t enter the equation, it all about using “laws” “data” “past mistakes” and all the other names we give “things” we think are correct. Most of the time it all pans out and I am grateful for the people how think like that and can delve into a realm I cannot. <br /><br />I guess the biggest problem is it’s just over my head, and the process is something one must learn to understand.<br /><br />thx for the post, I've learned a lot.Jeff Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00667419764890599092noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8198390912401056862.post-41344449557022596722010-06-19T09:45:51.310-05:002010-06-19T09:45:51.310-05:00Roy, I hear you. I'm right there with you.
Th...Roy, I hear you. I'm right there with you.<br /><br />The Mother, I thought this subject would get you stirred up.Stephanie Barrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17772217449161603561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8198390912401056862.post-61582849572580712502010-06-19T09:23:34.895-05:002010-06-19T09:23:34.895-05:00Every scientist wants to be the guy who discovers ...Every scientist wants to be the guy who discovers what everybody's been doing wrong all those centuries. That's how you make yourself immortal.<br /><br />And it always fascinates me that the pseudoscience quacks are always accusing the SCIENTISTS of being on big pharma's payroll, since THEY are the ones making money on every patient they shill. <br /><br />But we're the small minded ones, who can't grasp the big picture, and refuse to consider their way out theories. Newsflash--that indignant antipathy toward the scientific community has been the calling card of the quack since time immemorial. From Thurneisser in the 16th century to Wakefield today.The Motherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15157821003454766570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8198390912401056862.post-83436810967119634722010-06-18T21:51:00.186-05:002010-06-18T21:51:00.186-05:00One of my favorite lines from the Stargate: SG-1 T...One of my favorite lines from the <i>Stargate: SG-1</i> TV series was by a young scientist named Nyan in the "New Ground" episode: "Teal'c, I'm a scientist. When I find evidence that my theories are wrong, it's as exciting as if they were correct." And that's the beauty of science; there's always more to find out. That open end to the discovering of evidence is the soul of the quest for knowledge; certainty is the killer of that search.Royhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01648670975466222140noreply@blogger.com