Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Calling bullshit

callingbullshit.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 287 posts

Re: Calling bullshit

#181

Post by mistermann »

E6300 wrote: post #167
mistermann wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he is a denier, I honestly believe he is poking fun at the supremely confident masses who are absolutely sure climate change is precisely as the scientists say , and that anyone that disagress in the slightest is a denier/idiot/whatever. He also happens to be correct, the general public doesn't understand the intricacies of climate change. I'm no denier either, but you'll have to pardon me if I choose t…

If you get diagnosed with cancer, would you go to med school and wait until you graduate and can fully understand the diagnosis and how the prescribed treatment was arrived at by your doctor before you follow it, or would you follow the treatment as closely as possible as soon as possible? Perhaps climate scientists don't know with completely precision everything there is to know about climate change. But as far as a…

> Perhaps climate scientists don't know with completely precision everything there is to know about climate change.

Don't be surprised when people don't trust you if you don't disclose that fact.

Re: Calling bullshit

#182

Post by DonHopkins »

yongjik wrote: post #177
mistermann wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he is a denier, I honestly believe he is poking fun at the supremely confident masses who are absolutely sure climate change is precisely as the scientists say , and that anyone that disagress in the slightest is a denier/idiot/whatever. He also happens to be correct, the general public doesn't understand the intricacies of climate change. I'm no denier either, but you'll have to pardon me if I choose t…

> There are highly trained scientists who don't fully support the party line, and they are not allowed to speak. Name one.

Nobody knows their names, because they're not allowed to speak.

Re: Calling bullshit

#183

Post by DonHopkins »

mistermann wrote: post #181
E6300 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you get diagnosed with cancer, would you go to med school and wait until you graduate and can fully understand the diagnosis and how the prescribed treatment was arrived at by your doctor before you follow it, or would you follow the treatment as closely as possible as soon as possible? Perhaps climate scientists don't know with completely precision everything there is to know about climate change. But as far as a…

> Perhaps climate scientists don't know with completely precision everything there is to know about climate change. Don't be surprised when people don't trust you if you don't disclose that fact.

Says the guy who brings bullshit to a discussion about calling bullshit.

Re: Calling bullshit

#184

Post by mistermann »

yongjik wrote: post #177
mistermann wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he is a denier, I honestly believe he is poking fun at the supremely confident masses who are absolutely sure climate change is precisely as the scientists say , and that anyone that disagress in the slightest is a denier/idiot/whatever. He also happens to be correct, the general public doesn't understand the intricacies of climate change. I'm no denier either, but you'll have to pardon me if I choose t…

> There are highly trained scientists who don't fully support the party line, and they are not allowed to speak. Name one.

Judith Curry

https://judithcurry.com/2017/01/03/jc-in-transition/

Look at how this mildly (at best) informed senator encounters facts that don't support his hypothesis, look at how he, an amateur, speaks to a top scientist!

I believe many if not most scientists are at least partially lying to people, and by lying I don't mean they are accidentally mistaken, I mean that they know that some of what they are saying is speculative, but they pass it off as established fact. I look forward to stopping thinking this way when the scientific community admits to this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oh6zDbWMuP0

I suppose (sigh) that I must pre-emptively add that no, indeed, she wasn't in fact literally prevented from speaking. I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to decide for themselves whether all is well in this situation.

Re: Calling bullshit

#185

Post by gknoy »

BeetleB wrote: post #143
blazespin wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're close, but still misguided. The issue isn't so much critical thinking (though that is a part of it) but a mismatch in baseline assumptions. Right makes might versus Might makes right, belief in the golden rule (duoaywhtduy or he who has the gold, makes the rules), the glass is half empty versus half full, etc. Unless you share the answers to these assumptions, you can't have a common dialogue. I mean,…

>You really think Kim Jong-un is going to listen to reason when he has nukes? This statement, my friends, is how most persuasion works in the world. No facts, just statements like: "You really think...?" If the person responds with "It's plausible - why not?", then you say: "I mean, Come On!" While it may be hard for some to believe, I write this comment with full seriousness and not as a joke. This really is how mos…

For anyone else who was interested in looking this up on Amazon:

https://smile.amazon.com/Influence-Psychology-Persuasion-Rob...

Re: Calling bullshit

#186

Post by yongjik »

mistermann wrote: post #181
E6300 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you get diagnosed with cancer, would you go to med school and wait until you graduate and can fully understand the diagnosis and how the prescribed treatment was arrived at by your doctor before you follow it, or would you follow the treatment as closely as possible as soon as possible? Perhaps climate scientists don't know with completely precision everything there is to know about climate change. But as far as a…

> Perhaps climate scientists don't know with completely precision everything there is to know about climate change. Don't be surprised when people don't trust you if you don't disclose that fact.

"Doc, will I die of liver cancer if I keep drinking?"

"Yes, science is very certain on that. You will die."

"So, you know everything there is to know about livers or cancers, with complete precision?"

"What? Of course not, why would anyone even think that?"

"Hah, I thought so, now I won't trust you!"

Re: Calling bullshit

#187

Post by mistermann »

DonHopkins wrote: post #176
ue_ wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean to excuse the opinions he has on women, which I agree are deplorable, but I want to ask: what is wrong with being an activist for men's rights?

"Men's Rights Activist" is a euphemism for these people: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/ Described in The Guardian as a "toxic technoculture on a spectrum of digital misogyny": https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/14/the-red-p... The term "red pill" is also common on 4chan's "politically incorrect" /pol/ board where taking the red pill is usually used to mean embracing conservative political thought a…

I wonder if it's possible to be a men's rights activist without being considered a misogynist.

Re: Calling bullshit

#188

Post by DonHopkins »

mistermann wrote: post #184
yongjik wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are highly trained scientists who don't fully support the party line, and they are not allowed to speak. Name one.

Judith Curry https://judithcurry.com/2017/01/03/jc-in-transition/ Look at how this mildly (at best) informed senator encounters facts that don't support his hypothesis, look at how he, an amateur, speaks to a top scientist! I believe many if not most scientists are at least partially lying to people, and by lying I don't mean they are accidentally mistaken, I mean that they know that some of what they are saying is s…

You failed to prove she was "not allowed to speak" by posting a link to a video of her literally SPEAKING in front of Congress.

Did somebody interrupt her, and that's the best proof you can come up with of your assertion "There are highly trained scientists who don't fully support the party line, and they are not allowed to speak."

Being highly criticized by your peers is not the same as not being allowed to speak.

Do you have any better examples of scientists who were not allowed to speak -- perhaps a scientist who hasn't actually testified in front of Congress on live national television, written an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, boasts of having a total of 12,000 citations of her publications, and a blog that gets on average about 12,000 ‘hits’ per day, and 300-400 comments?

Or is that all you've got?

Re: Calling bullshit

#189

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

DonHopkins wrote: post #176
ue_ wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean to excuse the opinions he has on women, which I agree are deplorable, but I want to ask: what is wrong with being an activist for men's rights?

"Men's Rights Activist" is a euphemism for these people: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/ Described in The Guardian as a "toxic technoculture on a spectrum of digital misogyny": https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/14/the-red-p... The term "red pill" is also common on 4chan's "politically incorrect" /pol/ board where taking the red pill is usually used to mean embracing conservative political thought a…

“red pill” is a related subculture to “Men's Rights Activists”, and there's surely significant overlap, but they're not one and the same.

Re: Calling bullshit

#190

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

mistermann wrote: post #187
DonHopkins wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Men's Rights Activist" is a euphemism for these people: https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/ Described in The Guardian as a "toxic technoculture on a spectrum of digital misogyny": https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/14/the-red-p... The term "red pill" is also common on 4chan's "politically incorrect" /pol/ board where taking the red pill is usually used to mean embracing conservative political thought a…

I wonder if it's possible to be a men's rights activist without being considered a misogynist.

By not being a misogynist, yes.
Post reply on HN