In other areas of science not as well settled (e.g., #COVID19), they seek to undermine current scientific consensus by vastly exaggerating the evidence behind minority and fringe positions and mischaracterizing and minimizing evidence in support of current consensus. 2/
-
-
Show this thread
-
They then add to this technique conspiracy theories to “explain” why the fringe science is dismissed and not taken seriously by relevant experts and fake experts (plus the odd real expert turned fringe) to give the appearance of authority to fringe viewpoints. 3/
Show this thread -
The idea is to produce the impression of a legitimate scientific controversy where there is none. That’s how science denial works. 4/4
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We don't deny that expert con artists and expert pseudoscientists have different views than expert scientists. If I want to know more about fraud or flimflam I will consult with an expert In one of those fields.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
They seem to not know the definition of consensus either
-
I love when they say that Galileo was once agaimst the "consensus".
Yes but it wasn't a "consensus" of scientists! It was a consensus of theocrats that viewed the science as threatening their religious beliefs and control!
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.