One problem is the people telling us to just “follow the science” rarely seem to understand the interaction between things science can and has resolved and the unknowns and trade-offs that cannot be resolved by appeals to “The Science.” They’re often using science as a talisman.https://twitter.com/jflier/status/1345417443909500931 …
-
-
(Sorry I work in an information school and we’re very steeped in all the “data science” stuff, and a good deal of it is junk. But I understand what you’re trying to say, follow the well-considered evidence subject to scientific understanding.)
-
Yes, but that's a very long phrase. But yes: "follow the well-considered evidence subject to scientific understanding," is more like it.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Yes, I agree.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I've been trying to understand how data, charts, and graphs can deceive. It's complicated. I've had to select a couple of people I trust to explain data to me, knowing that there is, at this time, no final "right" answer.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Agreed...I don't think there is any neutral way to 'follow' data. There is always curation:https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/667051/epidemic-illusions-by-eugene-t-richardson-foreword-by-paul-farmer/ …
Thanks. 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.