People like to believe what they want to believe because it serves their interests. Kind of like the film “Thank You For Smoking”. A lot of them aren’t repeating the bullshit they hear because they believe it. They repeat it so some other moron will believe it.
I remember on The Andy Griffith Show, probably every other episode had Barney or somebody falling for some fool thing, or city slickers came to the town to try and rip the people off.
But the barrier for communication was so much higher then. People had to come to the town. Rumors could only spread so far without running into a gatekeeper like Andy who might be listened to.
Now the barrier for shitty ideas is basically zero, and we have no gatekeepers at all. So people are dumber. But it’s with good reason.
IT’S THE INTERNET. It sucks. TV had all of the “boob tube” crap thrown at it but the Internet has absolutely triumphed over us all, no one dares to speak against it.
The printing press made greatest ideas available to even the stupidest person.
The internet reverse that flow and let the stupidest people spread their ideas to everyone.
Great minds …
Or the village wise-person would blame someone else for witchcraft and get them burned at the stake or drowned.
There were nuggets of wisdom dispensed by such wise-people of old, embedded in a large pile of horseshit.
I routinely horrified my ex-wife by returning from shopping bearing things like lungs, kidneys and various offal. The dogs, however, were pretty happy.
Yeah, you can occasionally find cattle lungs for sale. In a fairly upmarket supermarket. No, I dont have a recipe.
But (taking this back on topic, maybe… or at least in that direction) that is how apex predators work: eat the most valueable part of the prey first; this is why we have an epidemic here in South African waters of Orcas attacking and eating Great White shark’s livers.
And the published scientific research on this is accepted.
Indeed. Discussing what to feed my cats with my vet, I made a comment about “chicken/beef/whatever byproducts” being guts and such, and my vet pointed out that cats in the wild eat the stomach, including its contents, of the prey they take down. But it’s very easy for people to demonize it as gross and unhealthy.
I had missed this one. I didn’t know that magnets were on the list of things Trump doesn’t understand.
Yeah though without the scientific method there is no way to tell the difference between Dr Fauci telling you to wear a mask and the “expert” telling you to inject bleach to treat COVID
That’s what the evidence says.
A study published in Nature 1 today finds that dogs possess genes for digesting starches, setting them apart from their carnivore cousins — wolves.
Now, which is cause and which effect are still debatable. Did dogs evolve the ability to digest human food better after they started associating with us? Or did a sub-population of wolves start eating human food because they could digest it better, and then start becoming friendly with humans? Could be either way.
But dogs definitely are evolved to eat a more plant-heavy diet than wolves.
This is another problem - most people dont understand how science works. That accepted theories may change over time or as new evidence emerges, or new technology changes the way things are tested. People want a steady and reliable answer to everything, something that doesn’t change. Ever. That’s why they wont rely some room of eggheads in Washington doing fuzzy science, but instead rely on the bible.
Most people don’t understand the meaning of the word theory in the context of science. They think it means guess or educated guess. I’m sure we have all heard some creationtist say “Evolution is just a theory.”
Coincidentally came across this
I routinely see people rejecting science-based medicine because its practices change in accord with new evidence. They instead embrace homeopathy and those good old-timey remedies which are never discarded.
I’m reminded of a line I heard years ago, about people preferring certainty over truth. “People don’t want to be told that there’s a 90% chance that white is white and black is black. They want to be told that black is white and white is black, and you’ll burn in Hell if you don’t believe it.”
Isaac Asimov: “Creationists make it sound as though a ‘theory’ is something you dreamt up after being drunk all night.”
Yes, I was going to say this in my previous post – I don’t think the OP picked the best example of the phenomenon that (s)he then goes on to outline. I don’t think people should reject the data of course but there is still room for some degree of doubt or nuance when it comes to a topic like nutrition.
In terms of the more general point about science, I’ve thought about it a bit and my opinion has jumped around.
I think apart from religion, there is also a valueing of tangible over abstract things to many Americans. I rarely hear people describe say, chemistry as if it is just people making up stuff at will. Chemistry has beakers, and bunsen burners, that’s real science, right?
Other fields of science are just equations on a blackboard; they don’t actually test their ideas, do they?
So interestingly homeopathy is not “old-timey” knowledge it was actually created to be consciously diametrically opposed to the scientific method that was starting to gain traction in the medical field at the time. So it’s not that the ideas backing it up are complete nonsense (at the time of its inception nobody knew that), even if they had happened
upon an effective theory of disease they would never have developed effective treatments as they were fundamentally opposed to the science that would have let them do that
Though in defense of the founders of homeopathy they also believed (rightly) that their medicines were much better than a lot of the “scientific” medicines if the day, as they may not do very much but at least they were not actively harmful.
I don’t think your “rightly” is quite correct, but depending on how you define homeopathy and when you are talking about, humoral theory was still important in medicine, and not discarded until the 19th century (and still remains in some alternative medicine). So the founders of homeopathy weren’t exactly competing against science in the way contemporary proponents of homeopathy are.
There’s not much doubt that a “medical” treatment simply being ineffective and (mostly) harmless is an improvement on something that’s actively harmful.
Science-based medicine has advanced just a wee bit since Hahnemann’ heyday in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Interestingly, in addition to being the Founding Father of homeopathy, Hahnemann was convinced that coffee caused many diseases. Later he abandoned that theory, deciding that lichens were the source of much disease.
Further researching this idea, it seems that homeopaths are still suspicious of lichens, apparently believing that a particular lichen makes people wet, dry*, slow and jealous.
*it may seem contradictory to believe that a particular substance causes one to be wet and dry, but the author(s) also note that lichen tea used as a native American remedy was used both to relieve diarrhea and as a laxative. 
All I meant was that in reference to which plants were safe to eat, which ones were medicinal, and so forth, it’s not like they had to reinvent the wheel every time; they had the wise women and shamans who were aware of that kind of thing, and filled the “expert” role. Experts aren’t a new idea at all.
The problem there is that one side of the political spectrum has, over decades, built up an alternate “truth” ecosystem that competes with the “conventional” media and experts. In my view, this is a HUGE problem- used to be that both sides had the same truth, and argued about how to deal with it, but now they just argue about what the truth is. And there’s no good way out of that- if through some quirk of nature, a real true fact was held by the Fox/Newsmax side of things, I know I’d certainly disregard it because of where it comes from, and I have no doubt whatsoever that the people on the other side are constantly doing the same thing.
Yeah, I’ve said things that reference geological time to people, and their eyes just glaze over; they apparently can’t even comprehend the idea of millions and billions of years passing. It’s not someone getting huffy that Bishop Ussher said the world was 4008 years old because the Bible says so, it’s watching the mental safety valve pop open while they think.
It’s being unable to transition from the concrete “a year is 365 days, four seasons, 12 months, 52 weeks” type thinking to “34 million years ago, the Himalayas were forming, the Ice ages were beginning, and our ancestors were some sort of proto-Old World monkeys.” And going past that to realize that 34 million years ago was recent in geologic time is just beyond them.
I suspect that talking in light years, and other astronomical units is similarly unable to be abstractly understood by many people. Or microscopic things- like how small bacteria and viruses are, could be another one they can’t quite grasp.