{"id":30608,"date":"2016-11-17T01:00:55","date_gmt":"2016-11-17T06:00:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/?p=30608"},"modified":"2016-11-09T10:33:58","modified_gmt":"2016-11-09T15:33:58","slug":"qotd-climate-change","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/2016\/11\/17\/qotd-climate-change\/","title":{"rendered":"QotD: Scientific credibility"},"content":{"rendered":"

Today I saw a link to an article in Mother Jones<\/em><\/a> bemoaning the fact that the general public is out of step with the consensus of science on important issues. The implication is that science is right and the general public are idiots. But my take is different.<\/p>\n

I think science has earned its lack of credibility with the public. If you kick me in the balls for 20-years, how do you expect me to close my eyes and trust you?<\/p>\n

If a person doesn\u2019t believe climate change is real, despite all the evidence to the contrary, is that a case of a dumb human or a science that has not earned credibility? We humans operate on pattern recognition. The pattern science serves up, thanks to its winged monkeys in the media, is something like this:<\/p>\n

Step One:<\/strong> We are totally sure the answer is X.<\/p>\n

Step Two:<\/strong> Oops. X is wrong. But Y is totally right. Trust us this time.<\/p>\n

Science isn\u2019t about being right every time, or even most of the time. It is about being more<\/em> right over time and fixing what it got wrong. So how is a common citizen supposed to know when science is \u201cdone\u201d and when it is halfway to done which is the same as being wrong?<\/p>\n

You can\u2019t tell. And if any scientist says you should be able to tell when science is \u201cdone\u201d on a topic, please show me the data indicating that people have psychic powers.<\/p>\n

So maybe we should stop scoffing at people who don\u2019t trust science and ask ourselves why. Ignorance might be part<\/em> of the problem. But I think the bigger issue is that science is a \u201cmostly wrong\u201d situation by design that is intended to become more right over time. How do you make people trust a system that is designed to get wrong answers more often than right answers? And should we?<\/p>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

Science is an amazing thing. But it has a credibility issue that it earned. Should we fix the credibility situation by brainwashing skeptical citizens to believe in science despite its spotty track record, or is society\u2019s current level of skepticism healthier than it looks? Maybe science is what needs to improve, not the citizens.<\/p>\n

I\u2019m on the side that says climate change, for example, is pretty much what science says it is because the scientific consensus is high. But I realize half of my fellow-citizens disagree, based on pattern recognition. On one hand, the views of my fellow citizens might lead humanity to inaction on climate change and result in the extinction of humans. On the other hand, would I want to live in a world in which people stopped using pattern recognition to make decisions?<\/p>\n

Those are two bad choices.<\/p>\n

Scott Adams, “Science\u2019s Biggest Fail”, Scott Adams Blog<\/em><\/a>, 2015-02-02.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Today I saw a link to an article in Mother Jones bemoaning the fact that the general public is out of step with the consensus of science on important issues. The implication is that science is right and the general public are idiots. But my take is different. I think science has earned its lack […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":35193,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[65,28,41,16],"tags":[245,39,513],"class_list":["post-30608","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-environment","category-media","category-quotations","category-science","tag-climatechange","tag-junkscience","tag-research"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/favicon.png","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2hpV6-7XG","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30608","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=30608"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30608\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":36284,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30608\/revisions\/36284"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/35193"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=30608"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=30608"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quotulatiousness.ca\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=30608"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}