PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Rush on March 19, 2021, 06:05:13 PM
-
https://thefederalist.com/2021/03/18/one-of-the-lockdowns-greatest-casualties-could-be-science/?fbclid=IwAR0FvonGNp5JjUSymxdkQOwMUSxy8DzWNiOVa4s5pi9ftofaMwqRr-LmURM
-
And many accept the Demo-Fascist fake science and try to pressure government into sick mandates.
-
but so many people feel safer.
why can't you understand that "feel" is all the justification needed?
(now we can play "guess what font color should have been chosen")
-
but so many people feel safer.
why can't you understand that "feel" is all the justification needed?
(now we can play "guess what font color should have been chosen")
All my life I’ve gone with logic and facts and been driven nuts by people who base actions on emotions instead, because I clearly see the negative consequences of not being aligned with reality. In popular psychology people like me are criticized for “over-intellectualizing”. Psychology is a pseudoscience consisting of people who themselves over-intellectualize about how others aren’t in touch with their feelings.
-
Science might be the second or third greatest casualty. I'd put trust in government and popular media above science.
-
All my life I’ve gone with logic and facts and been driven nuts by people who base actions on emotions instead, because I clearly see the negative consequences of not being aligned with reality. In popular psychology people like me are criticized for “over-intellectualizing”. Psychology is a pseudoscience consisting of people who themselves over-intellectualize about how others aren’t in touch with their feelings.
Everyone I know who has made large life decisions based on feelings over logic have big problems with their decisions.
-
Everyone I know who has made large life decisions based on feelings over logic have big problems with their decisions.
otoh - my decision to buy a small airplane was not particularly logical. But I'm glad I did. I don't have the airplane anymore - sold it to make retirement affordable - but I don't regret spending the time and money on the airplane.
-
otoh - my decision to buy a small airplane was not particularly logical. But I'm glad I did. I don't have the airplane anymore - sold it to make retirement affordable - but I don't regret spending the time and money on the airplane.
You logically knew the airplane would make you feel good. ;D
-
otoh - my decision to buy a small airplane was not particularly logical. But I'm glad I did. I don't have the airplane anymore - sold it to make retirement affordable - but I don't regret spending the time and money on the airplane.
Our obsession with aviation, flying, aircraft ownership etc, I believe is deep in our DNA or we wouldn't do it. Either that or we are mentally ill.
-
otoh - my decision to buy a small airplane was not particularly logical. But I'm glad I did. I don't have the airplane anymore - sold it to make retirement affordable - but I don't regret spending the time and money on the airplane.
Yeah, but even then, there are logical and illogical ways to buy a small airplane. If getting yourself in debt to your eyeballs or otherwise putting yourself in true financial danger to get a plane, you're being illogical. If you can comfortably afford the plane, then it IS logical, it's just how you wish to spend your fun money.
Where people get caught is keeping up with the Jones. Getting loan after loan to have the shiny SUV or whatever even when you know it puts you in financial peril, well, that's feelings, not logic, and are decisions that you will regret later in life.
-
While owning an airplane had its appeal, I determined early on that renting was cheaper for the amount of flying I would do.
As to science: it survives and thrives. The worse case I know where politics subverted science and caused real harm was Lysenkoism in the Soviet Union.
-
While owning an airplane had its appeal, I determined early on that renting was cheaper for the amount of flying I would do.
As to science: it survives and thrives. The worse case I know where politics subverted science and caused real harm was Lysenkoism in the Soviet Union.
Didn't know much about that so i just read this and it sure sounds familiar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism
Isaak Izrailevich Prezent brought Lysenko to public attention, using Soviet propaganda to portray him as a genius who had developed a new, revolutionary agricultural technique. Lysenko's resulting popularity gave him a platform to denounce theoretical genetics and to promote his own agricultural practices. He was, in turn, supported by the Soviet propaganda machine, which overstated his successes, cited faked experimental results, and omitted mention of his failures
Sounds like Fauci and mainstream media.
the V.I. Lenin Academy of Agricultural Sciences announced that from that point on Lysenkoism would be taught as "the only correct theory." Soviet scientists were forced to denounce any work that contradicted Lysenko.[19] Criticism of Lysenko was denounced as "bourgeois" or "fascist," and analogous "non-bourgeois" theories also flourished in other fields such as linguistics and art in the Soviet academy at this time.
Wow, that sure sounds familiar. If you don't buy the covid hysteria you're a right wing conspiracy theorist, a racist, etc. etc. Likewise, climate change is "the only correct theory".
The only difference between them and us is we haven't gotten as far as imprisoning and executing those that don't follow the party line. But their leftists and our leftists are identical, I'm sure ours will get there soon enough.
-
I doubt any of your would recognize real science if walked up and bit you in the ass.
-
I doubt any of your would recognize real science if walked up and bit you in the ass.
We know damn sure by your postings that you certainly have never dealt, nor recognize what real science is.
-
I doubt any of your would recognize real science if walked up and bit you in the ass.
lol - does "real science" include correct spelling?
-
I doubt any of your would recognize real science if walked up and bit you in the ass.
I don’t know the detailed technical background or training of anyone on this forum. Unlike you, I simply assess their claims and arguments as dispassionately as I am able and within my modest abilities.
According to past statements you judge based on credentials. That is your prerogative. While appeal to authority is a logical fallacy it is a well known heuristic that produces “good enough” results that save time and finite resources in everyday decisions. But the whole point of a discussion forum is discarded if threads devolve into a battle of “my authority is better than your authority.” I.e. principals, not principles.
As to credentials: I do not have a doctorate degree; just a lowly undergraduate BS in physics. My main exposure to “real science” is when I was interviewed and hired on the spot by a Prof. Ed Egelman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_H._Egelman) while he was at the University of Minnesota. While I learned a little of biological sciences (probably one of the most satisfying jobs I’ve ever had) it was not why I was hired. I put this on my resume:
Jan. '90 - Software Engineer
Jan. '91 University of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN
Was wholly responsible for the design and implementation of a real-time image analysis system for transmission electron microscopes in the department of Cell Biology and Neuroanatomy. The system performs real-time image signal averaging, convolution, contrast enhancement, and 2-D FFTs. The system also handled the data acquisition and control of a mass spectrometer via an ADC/DAC card. System implemented on a Zenith Z-386/33 system running MS-DOS with a Mercury Computer MC3200 array processor. Wrote the software for the MC3200 in Weitek XL8032 RISC native mode assembly and the host program in 'C', HI-Screen XL, and 80386 assembly.
-
A diploma does not convey intelligence. It does not convey anyone with one as an expert.
It merely means the person that has their name on it attended the institution and managed to pass.
The old joke "What do you call a guy that graduates dead last in medical school? Doctor" is so true. As an example just take a look at Fauci.
I've know lawyers with JD's from prestigious schools I would not hire. I know a few MD's and DDS's I would never let touch me. And I know several PhD's that are just plain idiots with a diploma.
-
I doubt any of your would recognize real science if walked up and bit you in the ass.
What’s your point? Do you disagree with the following parts I bolded from the article?
What these scientists have in common is that they have been proved right. With so many COVID-19 deaths, it should now be obvious to everyone that lockdown strategies have failed to protect the old.
While anyone can get infected, there is more than a thousand-fold difference in the risk of death between the old and the young. The failure to properly exploit this fact about the virus has led to many unnecessary deaths and the biggest public health fiasco in history.
Lockdowns have generated enormous collateral damage across all ages. Depriving children of face-to-face teaching has hurt not only their education but also their physical and mental health. Other public health consequences include missed cancer screenings and treatments, worse cardiovascular disease outcomes, and deteriorating mental health, to name a few. Much of this damage will unfold over time, something we must live and die with for many years to come.
Making the Poor Suffer for Their Egos
While disastrous at the population level, lockdowns have effectively protected young, low-risk, affluent professionals who can work from home, such as politicians, journalists, and scientists. They transferred the disease burden onto older, higher-risk members of the working class, who have kept society afloat.
Any scientist active on Twiter, Facebook, and other social media must deal with some unpleasant anonymous trolls, but that goes with the territory and is not the issue. It is the attacks by politicians, journalists, and fellow scientists that send a chilling message to other scientists and journalists to watch their words and self-censor.
This, in turn, damages the public trust in science and public health. Instead, the field has been left to scientists who agree with the herd thinking generated by the media. Missing from the policy conversation is a broader set of scientists who understand there is more to public health than just infection control and that lockdowns can harm public health more than they help.
-
What’s your point? Do you disagree with the following parts I bolded from the article?
His point is to be a condescending prick, not actually respond.
-
His point is to be a condescending prick, not actually respond.
Yep. I still wonder if he’s Aunt Peggy.
-
Yep. I still wonder if he’s Aunt Peggy.
mikey is a fucking troll.
Do Not Feed The Troll...
-
Yep. I still wonder if he’s Aunt Peggy.
I don't think AP drunk-posts and has, if I recall correctly, better grammer and spelling.
-
Another drive-by trolling. Y'all take the bait every time.
-
I met Mikey some years back at Oshkosh. Actually good person except for his politics.
-
I met Mikey some years back at Oshkosh. Actually good person except for his politics.
He's a decent if quiet guy in person, but his net presence is a bit Napoleonic (if that's a word).
-
I've never seen him when he was sober so I don't know what his regular demeanor is.