awfully quiet

@wildgrass said
Things are very quiet in the science forum these days. Why? Is it the constant questioning of established truths like the shape of Earth or the existence of subterranean human-like reptiles that has beaten down the search for new knowledge?

that's my theory anyway.

Perhaps people would prefer to live in blissful ignorance instead of accepting facts. It is like that movie line in "A few good men", "you can't handle the truth".

Cognitive dissonance. When people cannot handle the truth they avoid it. That is my theory.

@sonhouse said
@Metal-Brain
Theory? HAHA, It is your MO.....

Trolling is yours. Still at it I see.

@metal-brain said
Perhaps people would prefer to live in blissful ignorance instead of accepting facts. It is like that movie line in "A few good men", "you can't handle the truth".

Cognitive dissonance. When people cannot handle the truth they avoid it. That is my theory.

Truth and/or scientific consensus is messy and does not fit in neat boxes for our consumption. It takes a lot of work and time and effort. Oftentimes on the interspheres I run into someone who pushes back on something and they say they "did their research". But if that research involves googling "vaccine skeptic" and reading those articles without addressing the actual science, they are not doing any research at all. They are reading propaganda. Harmful stuff.

@wildgrass said
Truth and/or scientific consensus is messy and does not fit in neat boxes for our consumption. It takes a lot of work and time and effort. Oftentimes on the interspheres I run into someone who pushes back on something and they say they "did their research". But if that research involves googling "vaccine skeptic" and reading those articles without addressing the actual science, they are not doing any research at all. They are reading propaganda. Harmful stuff.

What does that have to do with me?
Either you dispute one or more of my sources of information or you do not. Since you have not provided any sources of info yourself I must conclude what you wrote applies to you and not me.

Is everything you do not want to accept confusing to you? Being confused is not proof of anything, especially if you are the only one confused.

@metal-brain said
Perhaps people would prefer to live in blissful ignorance instead of accepting facts. It is like that movie line in "A few good men", "you can't handle the truth".

Cognitive dissonance. When people cannot handle the truth they avoid it. That is my theory.

Your "facts" are anything but.

You can't read a magazine and then be an expert on whatever the last article was about. You're only as good as the last article you read. And for you, that means the latest Qanon BS.

@suzianne said
Your "facts" are anything but.

You can't read a magazine and then be an expert on whatever the last article was about. You're only as good as the last article you read. And for you, that means the latest Qanon BS.

You are a lying troll. Go back to the debate forum to do your gaslighting.

@metal-brain said
What does that have to do with me?
Either you dispute one or more of my sources of information or you do not. Since you have not provided any sources of info yourself I must conclude what you wrote applies to you and not me.

Is everything you do not want to accept confusing to you? Being confused is not proof of anything, especially if you are the only one confused.

Not everything is about you.

@wildgrass said
Not everything is about you.

Ironic of you to say since you created this thread which is largely about me.

@metal-brain said
Ironic of you to say since you created this thread which is largely about me.

Doesn't this tell you something about your postings? I mean the fact that when people think about the lack of activity here they all look at you. No other posters come to mind.

@kewpie said
Doesn't this tell you something about your postings? I mean the fact that when people think about the lack of activity here they all look at you. No other posters come to mind.

LOL!
I'm not keeping people from creating threads on here. Maybe you should ask why others on here are incapable of creating interesting threads.
How did it become all about me? Are people too blown away by the facts I brought to this forum and have no confidence they can upstage me?
I can only be blamed for what I do, not what others do. Get a grip on reality. Why don't you create a different thread? Are you paralyzed? Do you have a mind control conspiracy theory? LOL!

@metal-brain said
Ironic of you to say since you created this thread which is largely about me.

No. The OP is not about you. I created this thread because there were no active threads in the whole science forum and I was asking why the public has lost faith in science. You are not required to participate in this discussion.

@wildgrass said
No. The OP is not about you. I created this thread because there were no active threads in the whole science forum and I was asking why the public has lost faith in science. You are not required to participate in this discussion.

LOL!
You said this in your OP:

"Why? Is it the constant questioning of established truths like the shape of Earth or the existence of subterranean human-like reptiles that has beaten down the search for new knowledge?"

Only an idiot would think that is not about me, especially since you are still sore about losing that bet to me. However, if it really is about somebody else, who? Tell us who it is about.

@wildgrass said
No. The OP is not about you. I created this thread because there were no active threads in the whole science forum and I was asking why the public has lost faith in science. You are not required to participate in this discussion.

I think one of the reasons why a certain segment of the population has lost faith in science is that scientific truth is always revisable in light of better evidence and new hypotheses. This requires re-thinking, and that is hard work. A certain segment of the population wants pat answers which don't change; they get fatigued easily when new data suggests something has to be revised.

Consider, for example, the public response to measures recommended to deal with COVID: wear a mask, don't wear a mask, no wait wear it, aw shucks it doesn't help after all if there's no social distancing and testing in place as well -- the story kept changing and some people gave up following the advice. One has to remind these people that science is not immutable gospel -- the best available evidence can be countermanded next week by better evidence.

@moonbus said
I think one of the reasons why a certain segment of the population has lost faith in science is that scientific truth is always revisable in light of better evidence and new hypotheses. This requires re-thinking, and that is hard work. A certain segment of the population wants pat answers which don't change; they get fatigued easily when new data suggests something has to be ...[text shortened]... t immutable gospel -- the best available evidence can be countermanded next week by better evidence.

Jerome Adams once said don't wear a mask and gave specific reasons why wearing masks do more harm than good.

Here is an excerpt from the link below:

“It's important to understand that we are looking at the data every single day and we make the best recommendations to the American people we can based on what we know,” Adams said on Tuesday.

“What the World Health Organization [WHO] and the CDC [The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] have reaffirmed in the last few days is that they do not recommend the general public wear masks.”

He then explained the reasons why.

“On an individual level, there was a study in 2015 looking at medical students and medical students wearing surgical masks touch their face on average 23 times,” Adams explained. “We know a major way that you can get respiratory diseases like coronavirus is by touching a surface and then touching your face so wearing a mask improperly can actually increase your risk of getting disease.”

"Adams went on to say that wearing a face mask “can also give you a false sense of security." He added that "you see many of these pictures with people out and about closer than six feet to each other, but still wearing a mask.”

He noted that there are also consequences to wearing masks.

“We still have PPE [Personal protective equipment] shortages across the country,” Adams noted. “The WHO mentioned this in their statement so we want to make sure we are reserving PPE for the people who most need it. That's how you are going to get the largest effect because if healthcare workers get sick, they can't take care of you when you get sick.”

https://www.foxnews.com/media/surgeon-general-explains-masks-public-coronavirus

Here is an excerpt from the link below:

"MARGARET BRENNAN: And the week before that, you tweeted in all caps, "SERIOUSLY PEOPLE, STOP BUYING MASKS." You said they were not effective. Do you regret saying that?

DR. ADAMS: Well, it's important for people to understand that once upon a time, we prescribed cigarettes for asthmatics and leeches and cocaine and heroin for people as medical treatments. When we learned better, we do better and the WHO, the CDC--"

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/transcript-surgeon-general-jerome-adams-on-face-the-nation-july-12-2020/

Adams clearly indicated that he learned something different to change his mind. The only problem is that he has never presented any scientific study in any of his interviews that I am aware of.

Where is the new data that suggests something had to be revised? The first step for you to prove that data changed is to prove it exists and he didn't make it up. Where is the scientific study that contradicts the previous data?

People get fatigued easily when no new data is presented and we do not know it actually exists. Why should you take his word for it when he lied?

We need to know for sure which time he lied. I know he, Fauci and Redfield all admitted they lied the first time, but how do we know all 3 did not lie the 2nd time?

You do realize that you are taking the word of 3 admitted liars, right? Why the heck are you inclined to take their words for it? Only a complete idiot would accept the word of a liar. Isn't that what you are doing?

Here is the study he based his first decision to recommend people NOT wear masks.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372

If I can show you this study you should be able to find the other one if it exists. Show me the data that changed. Prove they were telling the truth the second time.