I guess he is right. Believing that the scientific peer review process sorts through the garbage just makes me part of the Cult of Ignorance. I really should just not believe in the scientific process or the studies because they are opinions. Looking back, it all is starting to make sense. I should have realized when 95% of the scientist agreed that humans are contributing to global warming it was a scam. They were just agreeing with like minded people. Those other 5% they know what's up.
The Cult of Ignorance in America Anti-Intellectualism
- Thread starter GrayTide
- Start date
-
HELLO AGAIN, Guest! We are back, live! We're still doing some troubleshooting and maintenance to fix a few remaining issues but everything looks stable now (except front page which we're working on over next day or two) Thanks for your patience and support! MUCH appreciated! --Brett (BamaNation) if you see any problems - please post them in the Troubleshooting boarda>!
I guess he is right. Believing that the scientific peer review process sorts through the garbage just makes me part of the Cult of Ignorance. I really should just not believe in the scientific process or the studies because they are opinions. Looking back, it all is starting to make sense. I should have realized when 95% of the scientist agreed that humans are contributing to global warming it was a scam. They were just agreeing with like minded people. Those other 5% they know what's up.
As much as I like to dogpile on Cajun for certain things his points aren't that far off from reality (in some cases) here to join in.
There is a lot of junk science garbage pushed in studies that have an agenda behind them and it's not always seen by the masses where the funding came from even if it's available in the paper itself - especially when you have daily "newstainment" shows running puff pieces about them - for example Tuesday they were touting one about how coffee may make you live longer. Give it three weeks and they'll be talking about how coffee could possibly give you toe cancer or some such.
While that may be a separate or parallel discussion it still has an impact.
There is a lot of junk science garbage pushed in studies that have an agenda behind them and it's not always seen by the masses where the funding came from even if it's available in the paper itself - especially when you have daily "newstainment" shows running puff pieces about them - for example Tuesday they were touting one about how coffee may make you live longer. Give it three weeks and they'll be talking about how coffee could possibly give you toe cancer or some such.
While that may be a separate or parallel discussion it still has an impact.
yeah, on some level. but as we see on this board every time a climate change thread appears, that leads pretty quickly into the reasoning "if those idiots can't get it right about coffee, what do they know about climate change"
I think one of the reasons for distrust of "science" by many people is because they don't know if what they're being told is actually from science. Who and what is considered "officially" the spoke person(s) for science? Simply because some study is done by an organization who hires doctors, scientists etc. to do research, is that considered "science"? It seems what is considered "science" is very, very broad.
I remember watching the "gluten free" explosion years ago. I remember watching the national news and seeing a report that "research" and "studies" "now say that gluten causes" and they named a list of things that gluten caused, "inflamed" or increased your risk of. Within a year I watched grocery stores create entire sections of their stores for gluten free foods. I believe the gluten free industry almost immediately grew into a 13 billion dollar market seemingly over night. Then, gradually (meaning a few years) you started seeing new "reports" and "studies" coming out stating that gluten wasn't "bad" across the board for everybody. Primarily just for people who had celiac disease. Yet until this came out how many suckers stormed the gluten free isles and paid astronomical prices for food that basically did not do anything better for their bodies than if they'd bought the regular stuff? And that's just ONE example of crap that somehow started off being attributed to "science". There's many more.
I don't think people doubt science as much as they question whether or not what they're being told is actually science or some organization posing as the science community looking to make a buck?
I remember watching the "gluten free" explosion years ago. I remember watching the national news and seeing a report that "research" and "studies" "now say that gluten causes" and they named a list of things that gluten caused, "inflamed" or increased your risk of. Within a year I watched grocery stores create entire sections of their stores for gluten free foods. I believe the gluten free industry almost immediately grew into a 13 billion dollar market seemingly over night. Then, gradually (meaning a few years) you started seeing new "reports" and "studies" coming out stating that gluten wasn't "bad" across the board for everybody. Primarily just for people who had celiac disease. Yet until this came out how many suckers stormed the gluten free isles and paid astronomical prices for food that basically did not do anything better for their bodies than if they'd bought the regular stuff? And that's just ONE example of crap that somehow started off being attributed to "science". There's many more.
I don't think people doubt science as much as they question whether or not what they're being told is actually science or some organization posing as the science community looking to make a buck?
Last edited:
I read that as
"not a fan of any science that doesn't comport to my existing worldview"
and knowing you here for a while tells me I am reading that correctly
Here's my only issue with what you just typed......I read you as exactly the same way .....
I find that I'm very open to science that doesn't "conport to my existing worldview"..... but unlike some of my friends on the left, I'm not an expert on everything. So, sometimes I need a non-biased view..... which is virtually impossible to find anymore.
except, that simply isn't true for me. I am happy to change my mind, all I need is evidence. YOu know Scientific method and all that
I used to believe that Global Warming wasn't real, posted as such right here on tidefans many years ago, but the Science changed my mind.
and heck I've said for years here, show me some proof, any proof of anything supernatural, gods or demons and I will agree and change my view (course I am still waiting as there is none that I have seen)
can you show an example of the same?
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/13/opinions/david-brooks-sandwich-misses-the-point-filipovic/index.html
I know it is the evil communist News Network ...
I know it is the evil communist News Network ...
Interesting stance considering outlier examples are constantly used to justify federal government involvement in health insurance.
There is a comprehensive movement w/r/t education where the end state goal is to create dumber, placable underclass. Home school movements, "embrace the debate" style approach to science to satisfy the religious right, etc. If you don't think it is on purpose, you're fooling yourself. It is no conspiracy, it is basically said in front of everyone.
LOL, What? I am confused. Are you saying that the home schooling movement is purposefully creating dumber, more easily manipulated people? I certainly hope that isn't what you are saying. If so, well, I don't even know what to say to a person who could be that out of touch. I'll just let you reply before going on.
Latest threads
-
Alabama Football's Brown, Pierre Receive National Honors Following Win Over Tennessee- Started by Ledsteplin
- Replies: 0
-
-
-