Two possibilities, and this is true of all academics and authorities that peddle the same narrative. One is that she (they) is (are) aware of all she does not know and doesn't want to be called out. The other is that she is so certain that she is right that anyone who challenges her position must be misinformed or brainwashed; she is the…
Two possibilities, and this is true of all academics and authorities that peddle the same narrative. One is that she (they) is (are) aware of all she does not know and doesn't want to be called out. The other is that she is so certain that she is right that anyone who challenges her position must be misinformed or brainwashed; she is therefore unwilling to waste her precious time and energy engaging. The former is indicative of a much greater understanding of the science. One year ago I would have guessed that that were the case. These days I would bet on the latter. Folks like her have doubled down so many times that they have forgotten about the assumptions, inherent error and shortcomings of the methodology behind the studies that support their foundational opinions. To make matters worse they are surrounded by group think that not only reflects their scientific position but also validates their idea that all who disagree must be completely out to lunch.
Two possibilities, and this is true of all academics and authorities that peddle the same narrative. One is that she (they) is (are) aware of all she does not know and doesn't want to be called out. The other is that she is so certain that she is right that anyone who challenges her position must be misinformed or brainwashed; she is therefore unwilling to waste her precious time and energy engaging. The former is indicative of a much greater understanding of the science. One year ago I would have guessed that that were the case. These days I would bet on the latter. Folks like her have doubled down so many times that they have forgotten about the assumptions, inherent error and shortcomings of the methodology behind the studies that support their foundational opinions. To make matters worse they are surrounded by group think that not only reflects their scientific position but also validates their idea that all who disagree must be completely out to lunch.
Keep at it Steve. Great work you are doing.