It's difficult for me to be tolerant of people claiming they are able to recognize scientific authority on epidemiology, immunology, or climate change, when most don't even recognize high school physics in action, when they are explicitly challenged to consider something that is counter-intuitive.

Also, and more importantly, there is no scientific authority to begin with, for exactly this reason. Throughout history, whenever a scientific matter was treated as dogma, and not as "the best model we currently have while considering any and all new evidence and theories", it stagnated and crippled the search for truth.

Show thread

It should not be surprising that academic bureaucrats, who willingly become authorities on scientific matters in service of a political authority, are therefore oftentimes not very good scientists, and are prone to disregard dissenting opinions after making public announcements. After all, authority rests on trust, while science means you can be wrong anytime, and you should even welcome when that's the case.

@raucao interesting one. I'm not even sure I'd characterize it as "high school physics" though it's for sure at that level, something about the way teaching happens in school prepares people really poorly to reason about simple things like that. (Another *slightly* more advanced one: why do astronauts in, say, the ISS feel weightless? you'll get near 100% wrong answers).

As for the biological analog, I'd say it's way more hopeless as there are no simple answers anyway, in complex systems.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!