this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2024
1142 points (98.9% liked)
People Twitter
5419 readers
166 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Don’t trust science. Use it, scrutinize actual published science with it, and apply it within the bounds that the studies were done.
It's unrealistic to expect most people to get through the jargon and statistics that are involved in pretty straightforward papers. When you include meta analysis in that, most lay people would need to head back to school for a couple of years to get the necessary background.
This is where effective science communication are necessary. The scientific community needs to be able to speak to people directly to explain findings.
This is where the media of old would pick up the findings and condense them into a 10 min segment run every 2 hours for a few days.
But that requires integrity, skill, understanding, and doesn't help the anti-science political agenda.
(Yes, I am calling out FOX)
The problem is, the majority of people don't have the ability to do that kind of analysis. It makes much more sense for them to simply trust the consensus of the scientific community than any other course of action.
Unfortunately true - get to 2nd and 3rd year uni you start being taught about assessing peer reviewed journal articles based on which journal published them and their relative experience and authority, and the university of the authors and experience of their departments.
No one did it though - God forbid anyone do it based on a 6 second post.