Yes! "Listen to scientists" seems better!https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/sep/18/greta-thunberg-testimony-congress-climate-change-action …
-
-
-
They're the same thing. Science doesn't speak to us through a disembodied voice
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Science does not lead public health in a crisis. It may help for the next time (as in helping develop new kinds of vaccines, which science will follow up on for another year or so). But for example we could have eradicated this virus early 2020 without new science.
-
(I think we still could, but not by following science: by doing what is a lot harder now, and more expensive. But the downsides of not eradicating it still seem not to be bounded.)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
just read Thomas Khun from 1996. . . 'The Structure of Scientific Revolutions'. . . he spells it all out. . .
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Gets worse, you don't "following the science." You follow the products of science: data/evidence. So, you are "following the data." And, hopefully, you are not selectively following them -- and you can change your mind when the new data accumulate.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
So, what to follow then?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
“Ive been DOING science “. Wtf does that mean. Lol
-
Science is a verb, not a noun. Facts, theories, laws and principles are produced through doing science, but they are not science themselves.
- Show replies
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.