Yet another weird SF fan

I'm a mathematician, a libertarian, and a science-fiction fan. Common sense? What's that?

Go to first entry



<< current
E-mail address:
jhertzli AT ix DOT netcom DOT com

My Earthlink/Netcom Site

My Tweets

My other blogs
Small Sample Watch
XBM Graphics

The Former Four Horsemen of the Ablogalypse:
Someone who used to be sane (formerly War)
Someone who used to be serious (formerly Plague)
Rally 'round the President (formerly Famine)
Dr. Yes (formerly Death)

Interesting weblogs:
Back Off Government!
Bad Science
Boing Boing
Debunkers Discussion Forum
Deep Space Bombardment
Depleted Cranium
Dr. Boli’s Celebrated Magazine.
Foreign Dispatches
Good Math, Bad Math
Greenie Watch
The Hand Of Munger
Howard Lovy's NanoBot
Liberty's Torch
The Long View
My sister's blog
Neo Warmonger
Next Big Future
Out of Step Jew
Overcoming Bias
The Passing Parade
Peter Watts Newscrawl
Physics Geek
Pictures of Math
Poor Medical Student
Prolifeguy's take
The Raving Theist
Respectful Insolence
Seriously Science
Slate Star Codex
The Speculist
The Technoptimist
Tools of Renewal
XBM Graphics
Zoe Brain

Other interesting web sites:
Aspies For Freedom
Crank Dot Net
Day By Day
Dihydrogen Monoxide - DHMO Homepage
Jewish Pro-Life Foundation
Libertarians for Life
The Mad Revisionist
Piled Higher and Deeper
Science, Pseudoscience, and Irrationalism
Sustainability of Human Progress

Yet another weird SF fan

Friday, December 07, 2012

The Resemblance between Human Biodiversity Debates and Environmentalist Debates

One of the fans of human biodiversity theories has noticed the resemblance between the human biodiversity debates and environmentalist debates … but not in a good way. He starts off on the wrong foot by getting the criticism of global warming/human biodiversity wrong:

When the overwhelming body of scientific opinion believes something is true, the denialist won't admit scientists have independently studied the evidence to reach the same conclusion. Instead, they claim scientists are engaged in a complex and secretive conspiracy.
Most of us don't believe that the world's evolutionary psychologists/climate scientists are engaged in a conspiracy to Hide the Truth. Instead we believe that the world's reporters aren't covering the research right. We think it's possible that the reporters are overemphasizing some research and underemphasizing other research. This isn't even due to a conspiracy among reporters. It's more likely to be due to reporters preferentially covering the more spectacular conclusions. (Also see PhD Comics on this topic.)

One reason why a few people might reject science is the effect of scientific results propagated by rumor. Eventually a nonsensical conclusion reaches someone who knows it's bulshytt and rejects science itself instead of the communication chain. I would like to point out to these people that the activists sometimes accuse scientists of being insufficiently hysterical. That might be evidence that the actual scientists haven't sold their souls.

I have covered this before.


Post a Comment

<< Home

My Blogger Profile
eXTReMe Tracker X-treme Tracker

The Atom Feed This page is powered by Blogger.