# An interesting thought about science denialists **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 11, 2011, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940 "2011-09-11T14:30:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/61 "2011-09-12T13:49:37Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Right, but not the need of asking the same ones, virtually all the questions seen on the recent discussions from the denialists mentioned in the OP are of the “Have you tried 10:20:30?” variety, I’ll let Richard Feynman explain My questions weren’t of the 10:20:30 variety; I don’t suggest falsification criteria of my own, I merely ask what your falsification criteria are. ---
**Author:** ![enigmatic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@enigmatic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enigmatic)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/62 "2011-09-12T13:58:34Z")
> [@](#): > > My conclusions are based on my “gut feelings”, and no matter what science and reason somebody presents to me, it won’t change my feelings about it at all. I will still think somebody who denies science is an idiot. But as soon as you do that, you are denying science, that’s kinda the point. You don’t get to pick and choose, because as soon as you do that the leigitimacy of _everything_ else that you are doing collapses. Even if the other stuff is correct, you either got the right answer by chance (how would we know?), or you built the rest of your argument properly (how would we tell it apart from the stuff you did wrong?) This is the frustration FX, I’m not going to comment on nuclear reporting here, but there are other contentious issues that I _do_ have an extensive background knowledge of. The “popular” side of that debate has an argument that is hopelessly, comically, riddled with innacuracies and outright lies. I am confident in the knowledge that leads me to that conclusion. The “corporate” side of that issue provides information which is sometimes biased, is almost always _factually_ acurate. I am confident in the knowledge that leads me to that conclusion too. I have a lot of sympathy for some of the arguments made by the “popular” argument, but it is effectively impossible for me to engage with them because I am unable to trust any information that they give me. I may be talking to someone who is debating in good faith, but I have no way of knowing that, and I have no way of judging the extent to which that the information that they are providing in good faith has been contaminated by a handful of idiots who believe that dishonesty is OK if it’s for a good cause. I’m left with little choice but to go to the other viewpoint, because I can trust their facts. I can try to read between the lines, but I can’t read between the lies. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/63 "2011-09-12T14:05:54Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > Missed that. Trick question your honour, that’s like asking whether hebephrenic schizophrenia is a left-wing or right-wing disease 🙂 Well, I get the impression that the only reason to label a woo belief as “right wing” or “left wing” is because it _reminds_ you of a political stance that is right- or left-wing. “That person believes in the healing power of Jesus. That reminds me of religious fundamentalism, therefore it’s a right-wing belief.” “That person believes that nuclear power is a bad idea. That reminds me of hippie idealism, therefore it’s a left-wing belief.” I’m sure one can easily find an ultra-left anti-abortion argument seriously advanced by someone (“It should not be the decision of an individual to deny the state another potential worker”), or an ultra-right pro-evolution one (“Nature gave the white man natural domination over the lesser races”), so why the need to politically classify at all? It’s like trying to sort people alphabetically and by height at the same time. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/64 "2011-09-12T14:23:15Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Since CAM is widespread, it seems like an excellent idea to have someone study the effectiveness of these methods, since the pill maker sure aren’t going to. Beyond the fact that “the pill maker(s)” and CAM proponents are often one and the same (the supplement industry is a multi-billion dollar enterprise), I somewhat agree that NCCAM may be doing some good. It is useful to have an obvious counter to the claim that “no one is studying our woo because there’s no profit in it”.\* However, there are lots of studies on alt med remedies being done outside of government-funded ones, and it’s questionable whether we need to keep pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into research that’s had so little return, when there are more promising avenues of inquiry that badly need funding. > [@enigmatic](#): > > We don’t seem to teach logical priniciples and fallacies in school And we need to do this badly. It should be a required part of the curriculum in public education. We could fund it in part through the monies currently going to NCCAM. 🙂 \*Speaking of logical fallacies, one of my favorites is when wooists boast about how herbs and “natural substances” are the basis of mainstream medicine and pharmacology owes so much to them, and at the same time complain about how “natural remedies” are ignored by mainstream medicine because they can’t be patented. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/65 "2011-09-12T14:39:35Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > And we need to do this badly. It should be a required part of the curriculum in public education. I would have said, “And we badly need to do this.” Because we’re already doing it badly. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/66 "2011-09-12T14:54:10Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, agreed. But that’s not the problem with NCCAM. Here’s the [problem with NCCAM](http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/03/senator_tom_harkin.php): > > Harkin as much as admits that the reason he’s caused millions of dollars to be fenced off for NCCAM was not to _test_ alternative medicine but to prove it works. In a world of limited research dollars, spending this much not because honest analysis indicates a fruitful area of inquiry, but because a nutcase with a senator’s hat thinks bee pollen cures allergies. Alternative medicine is an industry, pushed by vitamin and supplement manufacturers and television personalities like Dr. Oz. I’m betting that Tom Harkin gets significant campaign dollars from this industry, and I certainly don’t doubt that he has a ridiculous, pigheaded view of what the role of the NCCAM is. But regardless of whether or not AM is total woo, there are plenty of consumers interested in it, and it makes sense to try and give them some guidance as to whether there’s any evidence of efficacy in any of the mindboggling array of products available, or whether they’re just being ripped off. The industry, obviously, would rather the government either butt out completely or promote their interests under the guise of regulating them. If the NCCAM is calling some AM products out as being worthless, then I consider that a positive. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/67 "2011-09-12T15:39:07Z")
It doesn’t help that the entire history of science is riddled with examples where pretty much every “expert” scientists were dead wrong, and couldn’t admit it. Or worse, were blind to the greater consequences of the science they were involved in. Somehow now we think things have changed, and science can’t possibly be wrong about anything. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/68 "2011-09-12T15:57:44Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > Somehow now we think things have changed, and science can’t possibly be wrong about anything. Do you actually know anything? It’s amazing that such a complex network of intermeshed ignorance can function. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/69 "2011-09-12T16:30:05Z")
For starters, I will bet money everyone on this forum is wrong about something scientific. Hugely wrong. Almost everyone is. Yet the arrogance of the ignorant would prevent them from admitting it, much less learning why they are wrong. This arrogance may be tied somehow to the arrogance of the scientific denier. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/70 "2011-09-12T16:37:07Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > For starters, I will bet money everyone on this forum is wrong about something scientific. Hugely wrong. Almost everyone is. Yet the arrogance of the ignorant would prevent them from admitting it, much less learning why they are wrong. Some of us are more wrong than others. I’m sure there is factual information that people on this board lack. But the smart money is on the scientific consensus. > [@](#): > > This arrogance may be tied somehow to the arrogance of the scientific denier. It’s far more arrogant to think you can dismiss science you don’t understand and aren’t equipped to judge intelligently when there is overwhelming supporting evidence. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/71 "2011-09-12T16:39:40Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > It’s far more arrogant to think you can dismiss science you don’t understand and aren’t equipped to judge intelligently when there is overwhelming supporting evidence. That is exactly what I am talking about. The people here who think they know it all are dead wrong about something scientific, yet they bemoan ignorant people being wrong. I find intelligent educated scientific person in denial far worse than some religious whackjob doing it. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/72 "2011-09-12T16:49:43Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > I find intelligent educated scientific person in denial far worse than some religious whackjob doing it. To be fair though, FX, you’re dumb as a box of hammers AND apparently ineducable, so there’s really no reason for you to even post. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/73 "2011-09-12T17:06:16Z")
I swear I did not pay him to say that. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/74 "2011-09-12T17:27:35Z")
> [@FXMastermind](#): > > For starters, I will bet money everyone on this forum is wrong about something scientific. Hugely wrong. Almost everyone is. Yet the arrogance of the ignorant would prevent them from admitting it, much less learning why they are wrong. > > This arrogance may be tied somehow to the arrogance of the scientific denier. Are you thinking of some specific topic? I’d be inclined to take that bet. ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/75 "2011-09-12T17:28:21Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Which anti-nuke rhetoric is backed by poor science? Most people I meet are concerned about the long lifespan of radioactive waste and a lack of storage for it (both fully legitimate complaints), or the possibility of nuclear disasters (very illegitimate, but then again, it’s less this and more the other). Certainly there aren’t many politicians arguing on pseudoscience here, right? Can you cite some of them? You have obviously never heard of Helen Caldicott. Anti-nuclear activists make circular arguments. The won’t let us build storage facilities and complain about the lack of storage facilities. They won’t let use recycle the left over fuel and complain about the half-lifes. They make every nuclear power as expensive as possible to build and complain about the cost. Anti-nuclear nuts are actually the worst of the luddites. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv-mFSoZOkE](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv-mFSoZOkE) ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/76 "2011-09-12T17:31:06Z")
> [@MOIDALIZE](#): > > Alternative medicine is an industry, pushed by vitamin and supplement manufacturers and television personalities like Dr. Oz. I’m betting that Tom Harkin gets significant campaign dollars from this industry Correct, but [the biggest feeder at this trough](http://www.citizensforethics.org/press/entry/dietary-supplement-industry-bombards-congress-with-cash-then-gets-its-way) remains Sen. Orrin Hatch. \*"Far and away the largest recipient of campaign contributions from the supplement industry in the 2010 election cycle was Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) who took in $45,780, 59% more than the lawmaker in second place, freshman Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI). Sen. Hatch wasn’t up for reelection. Further, the supplement industry paid the lobbying firm of Walker, Martin and Hatch – in which Sen. Hatch’s son, Scott Hatch, is a partner – $125,600 in 2010 alone. Scott Hatch cannot lobby his father directly, but records indicate Jack Martin, a former aide to Sen. Hatch, lobbied for supplement industry clients… Lobbying spending by the industry has increased 86% since the 109th Congress. Further, the political action committees (PACs) linked to the supplement industry have increased donations to federal candidates. In addition to Sen. Hatch and Rep. Amash, CREW found major recipients of supplement industry cash during the 2010 election cycle included Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ) and Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), all of whom either sit on committees considering legislation affecting the industry or have an industry presence in their home states. The supplement industry is the third-largest industry in Utah, with revenues estimated **at up to $4 billion a year.**"\* (bolding added) > [@FXMastermind](#): > > I find intelligent educated scientific person in denial far worse than some religious whackjob doing it. What you’re missing (beyond the likelihood that many of your examples of “scientific denial” are pre-20th century) is that “intelligent educated scientific” people routinely, when their positions are proved wrong, accept good new evidence and revised standards. Additionally, the evidence that refuted those prior beliefs came from the scientific community, not from proponents of woo/“religious whackjobs”. These folks cling to irrational beliefs long after they’ve been shown to be false. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/77 "2011-09-12T18:35:28Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, I get the impression that the only reason to label a woo belief as “right wing” or “left wing” is because it _reminds_ you of a political stance that is right- or left-wing. > > “That person believes in the healing power of Jesus. That reminds me of religious fundamentalism, therefore it’s a right-wing belief.” > > “That person believes that nuclear power is a bad idea. That reminds me of hippie idealism, therefore it’s a left-wing belief.” > > I’m sure one can easily find an ultra-left anti-abortion argument seriously advanced by someone (“It should not be the decision of an individual to deny the state another potential worker”), or an ultra-right pro-evolution one (“Nature gave the white man natural domination over the lesser races”), so why the need to politically classify at all? It’s like trying to sort people alphabetically and by height at the same time. Note that I didn’t say antivaxing was a left-wing belief - I said that most antivaxers were left-wingers IME. The distinction being that, while antivaxing as a concept falls somewhere outside of the spectrum that is usually gauged by the left/right dichotomy, on account of being _nuts_, the people who spew said woo tend to also have more sensible ideas/conceptions on life/political ideals which are not off the charts. IOW, it’s not so much that a given woo is left/right-wing, but that the people who espouse that woo are left- (or right-)wingers otherwise. You don’t classify the woo, you classify whatever else makes a lick of sense to (or in) these people. ---
**Author:** ![Rhythmdvl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85f322/32.png) [@Rhythmdvl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhythmdvl)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/78 "2011-09-12T18:44:42Z")
> [@JoelUpchurch](#): > > Anti-nuclear activists make circular arguments. The won’t let us build storage facilities and complain about the lack of storage facilities. They won’t let use recycle the left over fuel and complain about the half-lifes. They make every nuclear power as expensive as possible to build and complain about the cost. Anti-nuclear nuts are actually the worst of the luddites. This thread probably isn’t the place to post such blatant straw men. Or did you mean to ironically put yourself square in the category of people being pitted? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/79 "2011-09-12T20:17:55Z")
Here’s another example of a leftist belief refusing to yield to actual evidence. The “Guns in bars” thread was originally started to discuss a proposal in Virginia tothe law to allow concealed-carry permit holders to continue to wear their concealed weapons in a restaurant or bar that serves liquor. The then-extant law required that CCW holders switch to open carry before entering any establishment that served liquor. Opponents of the law in that thread asserted that the law would lead to increased crime and violence in bars. Ultimately the law passed. Eighteen months later, I resurrected the thread to point out that a Virginia newspaper had analyzed every single crime report associated with guns and bars, and found no increase – in fact, a slight decrease – in gun-related crime. One poster’s reaction was to assert that that paper and the police were engaged in a conspiracy to hide crime statistics that would disprove their claims. And on the opther end of the spectrum, only one poster was able to admit that his predictions had been wrong. Note that I wasn’t demanding a complete capitulation on the subject – someone could reasonably take the position, for example, that the single year was an anomaly, or that other external factors were in play. But of the science-loving, intellectual-honesty crowd that posts here, I found exactly one poster willing to say that his prediction about what would happen following Virginia’s law change was wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2011, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940/80 "2011-09-12T20:48:26Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, agreed. But that’s not the problem with NCCAM. Here’s the [problem with NCCAM](http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/03/senator_tom_harkin.php): > > Harkin as much as admits that the reason he’s caused millions of dollars to be fenced off for NCCAM was not to _test_ alternative medicine but to prove it works. In a world of limited research dollars, spending this much not because honest analysis indicates a fruitful area of inquiry, but because a nutcase with a senator’s hat thinks bee pollen cures allergies. I’m confused about your point. If Harkin is complaining that NCCAM is trying to disprove things, it just shows that NCCAM is doing its job. Science is all about trying to falsify things, not trying to prove them. If your point is that politicians don’t understand how science works, I hardly disagree, and this is not party limited. Proxmire was a Democrat. Still, this is a far cry from supporting creationism. > [@](#): > > Correct. Which is kind of the point. The subsidies were put in place with the pseudo-claim that they made economic sense. When the science didn’t support that claim, guess what won? (Now, I am please to say, the tide is finally turning). Economics is not science. Neither is engineering. We both know that there were a lot of politics involved, and it is hard to change even now that the incorrectness of this decision is becoming more clear. If you were representing a farm state you’d be on a different side, no doubt. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/an-interesting-thought-about-science-denialists/595940.md?page=5)