Who wants to place a bet that this started when they started getting their asses kicked on global warming debates?
Yup that’s what I was taught in engineering school.... check popular consensus and proceed full speed ahead. /s
In other words, we don’t want to take the time or spend the money to have Moderators on our site so take your discussion somewhere else that cares.
Susie La Barre would make a good stripper name.
Money quote.
Q: How can you tell when one-side is losing a debate?
A: They cut off debate.
Bunch of quacks . . .
A politically motivated, decades-long war on expertise has eroded the popular consensus on a wide variety of scientifically validated topics.
Yep. And it's about damned time.
Case in point - the 1984 NIH Consensus Conference on Cholesterol. After decades of scientific studies that had persistently shown no relationship between saturated fat in the diet and heart disease, a carefully packed government committee, ignored the results and declared a "consensus".
And proceeded to sentence millions of americans to obesity, diabetes, heart disease, etc.
But it's taken 20 years for the story of how business interests manipulated the research, the grant funding, and the peer review process, to ensure that evidence exonerating healthy animal fat, and placing the blame where it belonged, on sugar, refined carbohydrates, trans fats, and industrial seed oils, never made it into the discussion.
It was so much easier to control the process, back in pre-internet days, when control of the committees and control of the media made sure that dissenting voices were never heard.
If you can’t take the heat, get outvof the kitchen.
Precious.
This is what Popular Science is reduced to?
#
Why Dudes Who Can’t Smell Never Get Laid
#
What Is the Point of the Female Orgasm?
#
What Our Eyes Say About Our Sexual Preferences
#
Man Diagnosed ‘Comatose’ For 23 Years Was Actually Conscious All Along
#
Will Running Barefoot Cure What Ails Us?
#
8 Signs That Girl You Met On The Internet Is Fake
Hmmm, Britt Hume is now saying that talk radio is bad for the GOP since it calls out pubbies who say they are “conservative”.
Interesting trend.
Leftscum shutting down facts that don’t fit their political meme?
Color me shocked. NOT!
These guys obviously haven't heard of Werner Heisenberg. Certainty is the anathema of science. I stopped reading PopSci a long time ago and this just reminded me why. They've gone PC.
At one point, the consensus among Europe’s intelligentsia was that earth is flat. Until science and scientific methods showed that consensus meant nothing in science. But then, it became very important again: It’s a consensus that the science of climate change is well established.
Uncivil comments? Or inconvenient comments?
When your positions don’t comply with 8th grade SCIENCE you grow too embarrassed to allow public ridicule.
Back in the 1970s, the term “Greenhouse effect” was quite popular. One issue, I believe it was Popular Science, after years of using it, had an editorial that they would NEVER use that term again. That was when they believed that a new ICE AGE was starting.
I watched their issued and sure enough, several years later the were using another term, GLOBAL WARMING!
“A politically motivated, decades-long war on expertise has eroded the popular consensus on a wide variety of scientifically validated topics. Everything, from evolution to the origins of climate change, is mistakenly up for grabs again. Scientific certainty is just another thing for two people to “debate” on television.”
Ha! Everything from evolution to the origins of climate change? What else is in that “everything” spectrum? I don’t recall any politician or tv talking head debating relativity or the big bang, so I am guessing there is no “everything”. They are just mad that the public won’t swallow their very politically charged “scientific opinion” on those two topics as the gospel.
You know what? If you politicize science, then you can’t complain about science being fodder for political debate.