- Joined
- Sep 20, 2013
- Messages
- 1,074
- Reaction score
- 1,152
@sghera64 why not try using something better for information than the news channels for science? There are plenty of amazing journals presenting real research instead of pushing agendas.
Honestly it’s because I’m lazy and I do enjoy sharpening my critical thinking skills this way.
I do read research articles, but often I’m not familiar enough with the author or their sponsors to know if they too have an agenda. I’ve found that many objective and competent scientists suffer from “unconscious bias” of the scientific kind.
I’m a scientist and recall many arguments between colleagues where folks really blurred the lines between deductive reasoning (factual rejection of a null hypothesis) and inductive reasoning (using facts to construct a hypothesis). I fall into this trap too often myself.
In contrast, I have been led to many clear and objective research from scientists by other reefers and scientists who do a nice job of pre-filtering for me (us) - - like the. articles Randy Holmes-Farley links us to.
I will share, that when it comes to matters like global warming and failing reefs I think the entire jury pool is spoiled. It seems like everyone alive and mature enough to understand either of these has taken a side. It is rare to find someone who will admit with unadulterated objectivity that they really don’t know what is really happening and how much of it can be explained by human activity. Those that might actually know what is going on from primary data analysis are so sorely lacking in humility that their conviction is likely mistaken for political bias and they get dismissed out of suspicion. A shame and our loss. We can’t separate signal from noise; so to speak. Hence the reason for some of the disputes in previous posts above.