I know I have a platform and the responsibility to use it carefully. I stand behind the analysis in this article, but I regret the way it has come across. (n/n)
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @ProfEmilyOster
it came across just fine. people will go nuts on you no matter what you write, because they hate you for some insane reason. ignore them
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @LucreSnooker @ProfEmilyOster
Maybe they hate her because of reckless articles that are deeply outside her areas of expertise and which are dangerously misleading?
2 replies 2 retweets 32 likes -
Replying to @TArchiving @ProfEmilyOster
i would count that as an insane reason. you don't need a PhD in insert-your-favorite-field-here to understand this kind of medical research. humility is a good thing, and she has it, but humility is not the same thing as "just shut up and don't even try to understand things"
4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Antivaxxers say the same thing before defending, say
@RobertKennedyJr’s misinterpretation of science, or before misinterpreting science themselves.1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @TArchiving and
yes, they do. unfortunately there’s no alternative. it’s not actually possible to do what The Experts say is best because they are individuals who often disagree or have no special ability to make judgment calls about trade-offs
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @LucreSnooker @gorskon and
I’m not sure you appreciate how you are using the specter of anti-vaxxers to create a fully general argument against independent thought. you wanna bite that bullet?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @LucreSnooker @TArchiving and
Oh, I appreciate it. It was *completely* intentional. That's *exactly* what I was doing. Antivaxxers are not the only ones who think they can learn enough about a complex scientific field such that they think their pontifications on it are as valid as those of experts.
1 reply 3 retweets 24 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @LucreSnooker and
I often intentionally use the example of antivaxxers in order to shock people into about what they are doing when they should be taken seriously making pronouncements far outside their field of expertise.
2 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @LucreSnooker and
It's good to see that I made I was doing sufficiently obvious that you picked up on it. Again, don't be like antivaxxers. Don't think that your amateur knowledge and learning are sufficient to be able to dismiss current scientific understanding.
2 replies 0 retweets 13 likes
It's not as though this is. my first rodeo either. I've been writing about this particular topic on and off for quite some time, for instance, in 2015.https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/on-the-right-to-challenge-a-medical-or-scientific-consensus/ …
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @LucreSnooker and
Glad you brought up the Harry Collins via Chris Mooney piece. He described a complexity that few get.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.