|
Post by smilodon on Nov 7, 2011 21:11:31 GMT -5
I wonder what that person thinks about other areas of science. Should Creationists be taken as an authority on evolution? Should we be turning to Quantum Mystics for information on physics? They'd probably say "no" despite the fact that AGW has been proven by many scientists, even ones that have been hired by the petrochemical industry. So they're a hypocrite just like the majority of AGW "skeptics".
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Nov 8, 2011 0:13:34 GMT -5
And what's the difference?
|
|
|
Post by CtraK on Nov 8, 2011 13:11:29 GMT -5
Don't forget that trying to refute points is counterproductive and just reinforces the false idea (link)The Backfire Effect was exactly what I meant to link to (on a blog called You Are Not So Smart), but I fucked up and linked to the same thing twice. So that plan kinda backfired.
|
|
|
Post by Old Viking on Nov 8, 2011 16:10:51 GMT -5
Let them believe whatever amuses them. We reached the global warming tipping point a long time ago; there's nothing that can be done about it except to watch and chuckle.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Nov 8, 2011 17:32:44 GMT -5
Let them believe whatever amuses them. We reached the global warming tipping point a long time ago; there's nothing that can be done about it except to watch and chuckle. We can still fix it, maybe, if we act right the fuck now and start taking more carbon out of the air than we put into it. Yeah, you're right, there's nothing we can do.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Nov 11, 2011 13:09:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by smilodon on Nov 12, 2011 12:18:29 GMT -5
The sad thing is that any agw "skeptic" will just look at that and say "CONSPIRACY!!" That's how right wing thinking works, anything that doesn't fit in your world view is a liberal conspiracy. AGW? liberal conspiracy GINI coefficient? liberal conspiracy Obama winning the election fair and square? EFFING LIEBERAL CONSPIRACY!
|
|
|
Post by Wykked Wytch on Nov 12, 2011 16:14:28 GMT -5
Don't forget that trying to refute points is counterproductive and just reinforces the false idea (link)I beg to differ - I was actually a diehard 9/11 conspiracy theorist until I felt doubt when I stumbled upon a website debunking their claims. I think it was this one: www.debunking911.com/ It was my personal starting point for skepticism. Even if you can't convince people right away, if you can make them doubt just a little bit, then they might go in the right direction.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Nov 12, 2011 16:32:24 GMT -5
Don't forget that trying to refute points is counterproductive and just reinforces the false idea (link)I beg to differ - I was actually a diehard 9/11 conspiracy theorist until I felt doubt when I stumbled upon a website debunking their claims. I think it was this one: www.debunking911.com/ It was my personal starting point for skepticism. Even if you can't convince people right away, if you can make them doubt just a little bit, then they might go in the right direction. No, you don't get to do this. Your anecdote does not refute actual data. Fucking hell, I hate it how people bring up outliers as if it means a general trend is wrong, this only matters if the claim is an absolute. From the article: Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger. [emphasis mine] You see those words there? They are vitally important and show why you don't mean fucking shit. Some people will change their mind some of the time, but most people will cling to their beliefs harder most of the time. You're the minority, congratu-fucking-lations, I don't care.
|
|
|
Post by tolpuddlemartyr on Nov 12, 2011 17:01:08 GMT -5
Some people will change their mind some of the time, but most people will cling to their beliefs harder most of the time. I know this but it makes me sad. The debate on global warming is literally the most important debate of our time as making the wrong decisions could literally cost the Earth. The side denying that global warming exists are made up of corporate sociopaths who'll happily trash the planet if it temporarily funnels more money to their shareholders. This isn't a battle for hearts and minds that rational people can afford to lose. Just how the fuck DO you win the argument in the halls of power if facts don't work? Sorry if that sounded a bit ranty, this whole thing just makes me despair sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by Haseen on Nov 14, 2011 5:15:59 GMT -5
I beg to differ - I was actually a diehard 9/11 conspiracy theorist until I felt doubt when I stumbled upon a website debunking their claims. I think it was this one: www.debunking911.com/ It was my personal starting point for skepticism. Even if you can't convince people right away, if you can make them doubt just a little bit, then they might go in the right direction. No, you don't get to do this. Your anecdote does not refute actual data. Fucking hell, I hate it how people bring up outliers as if it means a general trend is wrong, this only matters if the claim is an absolute. From the article: Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger. [emphasis mine] You see those words there? They are vitally important and show why you don't mean fucking shit. Some people will change their mind some of the time, but most people will cling to their beliefs harder most of the time. You're the minority, congratu-fucking-lations, I don't care. Umm... what exactly would you suggest doing? Even if, say one person changed his mind, and 10 people just believed in bullshit even harder, that's still one vote in the right direction...
|
|
|
Post by Sleepy on Nov 14, 2011 8:23:00 GMT -5
You see those words there? They are vitally important and show why you don't mean fucking shit. Some people will change their mind some of the time, but most people will cling to their beliefs harder most of the time. You're the minority, congratu-fucking-lations, I don't care. I'm not trying to sound mean, but there's really no need for such an attitude about the whole thing.
|
|
|
Post by brendanrizzo on Nov 14, 2011 11:01:14 GMT -5
Some people will change their mind some of the time, but most people will cling to their beliefs harder most of the time. I know this but it makes me sad. The debate on global warming is literally the most important debate of our time as making the wrong decisions could literally cost the Earth. The side denying that global warming exists are made up of corporate sociopaths who'll happily trash the planet if it temporarily funnels more money to their shareholders. This isn't a battle for hearts and minds that rational people can afford to lose. Just how the fuck DO you win the argument in the halls of power if facts don't work? Sorry if that sounded a bit ranty, this whole thing just makes me despair sometimes. I AM IN DESPAIR! THE FACT THAT WE WILL ALMOST ASSUREDLY DO NOTHING TO STOP GLOBAL WARMING UNTIL AFTER IT IS TOO LATE HAS LEFT ME IN DESPAIR!
|
|
|
Post by brendanrizzo on Nov 14, 2011 11:08:11 GMT -5
Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger. Okay, I have two questions. Number one, is how the hell does telling people facts only reinforce their false beliefs? That makes no sense whatsoever and I just cannot see how that happens. Number two, is that if the majority of people in the world will never change their false beliefs no matter how many refutations they give, then how come there are societies (read: every industrialized nation except America) where the population has become more liberal en masse? So if I'm inclined to doubt the study somewhat, I have my reasons.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Nov 14, 2011 11:21:08 GMT -5
Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger. Okay, I have two questions. Number one, is how the hell does telling people facts only reinforce their false beliefs? That makes no sense whatsoever and I just cannot see how that happens. Number two, is that if the majority of people in the world will never change their false beliefs no matter how many refutations they give, then how come there are societies (read: every industrialized nation except America) where the population has become more liberal en masse? So if I'm inclined to doubt the study somewhat, I have my reasons. It only works after they have been fed misinformation, not if you tell them the actual facts first. It's with how the brain works, by trying to refute the previous misinformation it strengthens all neural connections associated with the subject, including the one linked with the misinformation. So, in this case, you tell people that climatologists are fabricating data and you have the emails to prove it. This is an initial connection. Later on, after more facts are in, you say they scientists were cleared of all charges. This does form a new connection, but it makes the initial connection saying climatologists are fabricating data all that much stronger. So, when people are asked what they think about it, the strongest pathway is the one which states climatologists are fabricating data. So, the way to deal with it is teaching and working to get it right the first time.
|
|