How the denier mind works.
I've been debating with deniers for weeks on Twitter and it can be soul destroying, but I'm sure some are sockpuppets, that is, they are professional, paid deniers.
It got interesting the other day when we got onto politics where I agreed with deniers about Hillary Clinton, but after that the liberals went mad at me. It was strange because now the conservatives were on my side about Putin, Hillary, and Russia, although it didn't last long.
The liberals also started to attack China and as I don't like the demonisation of China I defended them, but after that, both the conservatives and the liberals were at my throat. It's a strange world because one conservative supported me about China. He was very anti-war and quite thoughtful.
The liberals were hot-blooded and aggressive. It seems they hate Trump so much that they are prepared to believe everything they have been told about Russiagate.
There is no ‘proof’ in science
In my view, science deniers misapply the concept of “proof.”
Proof exists in mathematics and logic but not in science. Research builds knowledge in progressive increments. As empirical evidence accumulates, there are more and more accurate approximations of ultimate truth but no final end point to the process. Deniers exploit the distinction between proof and compelling evidence by categorizing empirically well-supported ideas as “unproven.” Such statements are technically correct but extremely misleading, because there are no proven ideas in science, and evidence-based ideas are the best guides for action we have.
The Conversation
The thinking error at the root of science denial, by Jeremy P. Shapiro
34 comments:
Does this Shapiro guy even have a Science Degree?
I doubt it...
Lol! Matt the Denier immediately engage in dichotomous thinking.
Science is dichotomious thinking...
It’s discrimination and then corrective adjustment...
You test and if it doesn’t work you have to make an adjustment...
At least that is how it is trained... in US land grant universities...
Lol! You either didn’t read the article or you didn’t understand it.
Your hobbyhorse fell apart but you continue to deny it and ride on it.
“Printing money causes inflation!”
Then CBs are seen to “print money!” out the ass and prices collapse....
Science trained person would IMMEDIATELY make a corrective adjustment...
These Art Degree people don’t make the adjustment.... we see it every day..,
We Science people are rigorously trained to always be discriminating and then be making corrective adjustments towards truth...
I probably didn’t understand it and don’t want to..,
I don’t know what the guy is talking about I’m trained in Science...
If the guy doesn’t even have a Science degree your not going to learn anything about Science from him...
It’s a waste of time..l
“”hobbyhorse”
LOL nice figurative language finger painter...l
S, can you Art Degree people ever do anything without resorting to figurative language.?
Serious question...
S,why don’t you guys just go fo art and leave the Science to us?
Can’t leave science to someone riding a broken hobbyhorse fighting windmills. That would be a very stupid move.
Well why do you think the Science Degree was created?
Or do you think it evolved from the apes by random chance?
BTW saying that Matt’s doing science would be using figurative language meaning he has a wooden stick between his legs and doing a Trump double trigger with his hands. That the Matt Franko science.
Nice analogy.... again have anything other than figurative language?
Or still no value added?
“ Well why do you think the Science Degree was created?”
It wasn’t created to make you believe you that your hobbyhorse is the real deal while shouting yeehaw, with hands imitating double triggering shooting at windmills and You claiming that your “winning”.
And you’ve added value in this thread? None whatsoever.
Hey S,
Did you see this one from him yesterday
https://twitter.com/breaking911/status/1246208123767046153?s=21
He says “ “I was never involved in a model... At least this kind of a model."
LOL!! .. Savage!!!!!
Here the guy says: “ In evaluating the evidence for a hypothesis or theory, they divide the spectrum of possibilities into two unequal parts: “
Science doesn’t even have hypothesis AND theory...
You have two things here you have Thesis and hypo-Thesis...
Science starts with hypothesis which is ‘under-thesis’. it is less than a Thesis or theory
Liberal Arts methodology starts with a Thesis FIRST, then look for evidence or proofs support their Thesis...
And evidence that does not support their Thesis is discarded...
In Science when you observe conflicting evidence you are trained to discard the hypothesis.... and make an adjustment...
The guy doesn’t understand the Scientific process..,
You don’t understand that he’s talking about the deniers and not about science.
So that confirms that you didn’t understand the article. CHECK MATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Check mate is a figure of speech, just so you know.
He's allegedly talking about SCIENCE deniers not "deniers" in general...
Science is a method you cant 'deny' a method you can either be operating via a method or not operating via a method...
Hes not operating under the science method... he's conflating or synthsizing hypothesis and thesis... science method specifically does not conflate these two concepts, ...
You start with a hypothesis and if it is seen to fail you immediately discard it... you dont start with a thesis.... in science..
Matt thinks accounting is a science.............that’s all you need to know
It is:
https://bizfluent.com/how-does-4682007-why-accounting-science.html
You earn a BSAcc...
You guys are reeeeeeeeaaaaaallllly dumb...
I'd aay my hypothesis you guys average SAT about 850...
Matt,
There are numerous sites which call accounting an ART too ( and the term is not used disparagingly either)....... so it’s not even a close to unanimous opinion amongst accountants as to classification. So call me an accounting denier if you wish but there are more accountants who consider it an art by a long shot than there are climate scientists who dismiss AGW
I’m not dismissing accounting either, it has great value but it does not study any important underlying truths about our world. Without a monetary economy there would be no accounting. There would be nothing to study. But there would stilll be biology, physics, chemistry, sociology, anthropology etc
Accounting is bookkeeping with multiple lenses, which is the art part. Which lens do you use to look at cash flow, which do you use to look at profit/loss etc etc
You really shouldn’t die on this sword Matt. Accounting has value in our world but if we were taking a group of necessary people to go continue our species on another known habitable planet, accountants would be next to last to get on, just ahead of politician. They’d be behind a good janitor by a long shot.
Every other scientist has the math knowledge that accountants have. Accountants have invented their own rigorous systems for analyzing the financial world bu they have ZERO use anywhere else.
BTW Matt
You love using the word, maybe I should call it figure of speech, “Scam”in many of your comments. You do know how most financial scams are pulled off..............with help of ACCOUNTANTS. They are scam masters. Not trying to disparage all accountants btw, I know plenty serve good use.
My hypothesis is that you really envy talented people. You are just a simple numbers nerd (800 in math on SAT....well done!) and probably never could get those bitchy, hot, artsy type girls to pay you any attention. You just seethed when that stupid ,faggy artsy guy got laid and all you could do was jerk off while looking at her picture in the annual
We all have our hypotheses
“He's allegedly talking about SCIENCE deniers not "deniers" in general..“
And you don’t know how to differentiate between science deniers and science hence you conflate them because you felt hit by the criticism. Tough on you poor thing. I feel for you.
This is what art degree envy denial looks like.
An accountant is a technician. A monkey trained to follow procedure.
An auditor is more like a forensic scientist or investigator.
Auditors are called in when the monkeys are suspected of being creative.
Well stated Bob
Of course the auditor knows accounting just as well as the accountant that’s how he knows what to look for. Bill Black comes to mind
Hold on, hold on, Bob. If I may be picky :) An auditor is an accountant, just more specialized.
So, I would have said, "A bookkeeper is a technician."
Once you understand the accounting equation, Assets = Liabilities (including equity), you're good to go :)
The lowly bookkeeper is a technician, often overlooked and underestimated.
However, when the opportunity for control fraud presents itself, don't be surprised when the student becomes the master. Embezzlement is an art!
"he [i.e. Matt Franko] has a wooden stick between his legs"
STEM-trained as he is, I bet Franko missed the target and shoved the stick up somewhere else.
Just sayin' :-D
Post a Comment