You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Some of the loudest Proponents of Science — an identity moreso than a descriptor — are scientifically illiterate. If you say stuff like "there's a consensus in the field" or "this has been established for 50 years," and can't go any deeper than that, you're just chanting doctrine
First rule of fight club is know what you don't know. Don't hang your hat on statements about the state if the system that produces science in order to imply knowledge you do not have about its contents. Go learn, think. The men in white coats don't own the nature of the universe
The subtext is often something like "I'm smart enough to leave the science to the professionals" — this is *not* pro-science, it's pro-institution. At the population level, I suspect it hinders progress as or more effectively than many flavors of religious fervor
In a pro-science society, we'd all be able to participate in the human project — a landscaper notes a yet-undescribed interaction between warring ant colonies, a housekeeper notices a new trend in urban mold. We'd not pride ourselves on accepting our own cognitive impoverishment.
Consider for a moment that a housekeeper may have 20+ years of experience, 40-80 hours/week, learning the regional ins-and-outs of locating mold, removing it via a variety of physical + chemical agents, anticipating regrowth, etc. How many mold researchers consult w housekeepers?
For your consideration: Lyme disease. Here's the Wikipedia-level explanation of the history of the discovery of Lyme in Old Lyme, CT: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyme_disease …pic.twitter.com/4nwCub1jJi
...and here's the beginning of the story, wiped entirely or reduced to a one-liner or footnote in most popular summaries: https://www.ozy.com/flashback/solving-the-mystery-of-lyme-disease/82008 …pic.twitter.com/6JEVs8m04d
I think it's fine — and indeed, wise — to say "I'm not familiar with the work, but I understand that there's an academic consensus here, and if I had to I'd bet money on that every time." But it's not wise to be smug about it, or assume the matter is settled once and for all.
As we accumulate familiarity with & data on the phenomena around us, we tend to develop theories with increasing explanatory power & models with increasing predictive power. But a degree of humility is always prescribed, especially for those consuming the output third-hand.
But, if you -> can't go any deeper than that, you're just chanting doctrine. <-
Isn't reaching consensus and pushing that knowledge out to the general population sort of the point? Not everyone can go deeper but they can still benefit from truths that others have labored deeper on.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
