02-15-2019, 05:37 PM
Quote: @medaille said:
Of coarse you are right. Not as many scientist as lay people. Some things are at least to me quite measurable. Receding glaciers from satellite imaging and stuff. What melts ice? I have argued this point before that the man made climate change has not been proven. It is a theory based on data. Believe or don't really doesn't change my view as good stewards of the Earth. My thing is we already have over 8 billion people on this planet dumping their crap. What is so wrong with continuing to research ways to live cleaner. Large cities around the world with already barely breathable air. You don't need a weather man to know which way the wind blows. Is this going to get better when we hit 10 billion? It is just as ignorant to take a stance, its all lies and made up when some thing are as clear as the smog in these cities. We need to clean up our act regardless. That's my take.@suncoastvike said:
I understood what Maroon was getting at.
:#
Could have used a better reference is all I took from it. One can choose to except data, study's and conclusions or question their source, bias and validity. That is not the same as faith which offers none. That can be measured at least. Choice it the only thing that is comparable. I’m a big believer in science and that science and the
scientific method will be right in the long term. I’m also a big believer that there is a lot
of stuff that masquerades as science, but is either bad science, was setup to
prove whatever point the person who paid for the study wanted, hasn’t been
sufficiently peer reviewed, is taken out of context by the media or social
media, etc.
With regards to your point that people can choose to look
deeper into the science, that is true sort of.
The possibility that you can look deeper exists. That doesn’t mean that anyone has, or that
the right critical mind has, or that you are believing the right critical mind. If you aren’t
intimately familiar with the variety of research that has been done on an
issue, you are by definition operating on faith (Faith that whatever science
was done, was done correctly, was adequately peer reviewed, wasn’t taken out of
context, etc.) You have faith in the
scientific community and experts. You
can probably have more confident faith in something like Global Warming which
has garnered so much attention. You
should have less confidence, probably to the point of skepticism, in a study
produced by a company that has a large profit motive to get a specific result.
I see a lot of people who aren’t aware that they are
operating on faith in science, and aren’t aware of how much confidence they
should have in any particular conclusion that claims to be backed by science. They just see a conclusion that meshes with
their pre-existing beliefs, see the word science, and assume it’s a fact, they
assume that it’s good science. Because
it’s now a fact in their mind, anyone that doesn’t agree with them doesn’t
agree with facts is stupid, too stupid to listen to, not smart enough to not
talk down to.
As someone who doesn’t really fit in with many traditional political
viewpoints, I’ve found the left seems a lot more arrogant and condescending in
their viewpoints the last several years.
I think the right for the most part has been called out for their ignorance,
can see the flaws that they had, and have worked through it, and are more aware
of their blind spots. I don’t think the
left sees their own ignorance yet, although I think things like Covington are
starting to wake people up to how quick to anger and how easily they can be
manipulated by sources they once trusted.
