Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
HuckleB
HuckleB's Journal
HuckleB's Journal
April 2, 2016
"...
De Niro’s call for open discussion echoes the kinds of exhortations most frequently made to journalists — to provide a fair and balanced (translate: unbiased) account of any topic we report on by presenting all sides of the issue. De Niro, who claims not to be anti-vaccination, himself, may have thought he was doing the right and “fair” thing by giving a platform to Wakefield’s documentary.
But herein lies the sticking point: When communicators of any sort, journalists or otherwise, give an equal voice to unsubstantiated or even discredited ideas, they’re actually introducing bias — not removing it — by presenting a contrarian viewpoint as though it has a credible weight in the discussion.
This type of mistake is particularly egregious in the world of science communication, which by nature should be driven by data and hard evidence rather than feelings. And yet this is by no means the first time it’s been made.
The climate contrarian movement,for instance — perhaps one of the most famous widespread examples of science denial in the nation — was routinely given a voice in the mainstream media until very recently.
..."
-------------------------------------------------------
A good piece that covers the false equivalency issue quite well.
Autism and vaccines: why telling every side of a scientific story is rarely fair
http://mashable.com/2016/04/02/vaccines-autism-false-balance/#4D3I3rUHV8qz"...
De Niro’s call for open discussion echoes the kinds of exhortations most frequently made to journalists — to provide a fair and balanced (translate: unbiased) account of any topic we report on by presenting all sides of the issue. De Niro, who claims not to be anti-vaccination, himself, may have thought he was doing the right and “fair” thing by giving a platform to Wakefield’s documentary.
But herein lies the sticking point: When communicators of any sort, journalists or otherwise, give an equal voice to unsubstantiated or even discredited ideas, they’re actually introducing bias — not removing it — by presenting a contrarian viewpoint as though it has a credible weight in the discussion.
This type of mistake is particularly egregious in the world of science communication, which by nature should be driven by data and hard evidence rather than feelings. And yet this is by no means the first time it’s been made.
The climate contrarian movement,for instance — perhaps one of the most famous widespread examples of science denial in the nation — was routinely given a voice in the mainstream media until very recently.
..."
-------------------------------------------------------
A good piece that covers the false equivalency issue quite well.
April 1, 2016
He addresses the science denial of climate change deniers and anti-GMOers, showing how the combination might be rather unfortunate.
"...
Some who deny the reality of global climate change have argued that, even if CO2 is increasing in the atmosphere, who is to say it’s a bad thing? Plants breath CO2, so increasing CO2 should just increase plant growth.
Kromdijk and Long point out that this view is naive. This is based on the simplistic thinking that if some is good then more is better (the fallacious basis of the entire supplement industry). In reality, biological systems exist in a complex homeostasis. Further, evolution is very efficient at optimizing biological systems to their current environment. If you rapidly change that environment, there may not be time for evolution to catch up.
...
One of the talking points in the anti-GMO movement is that we do not need to increase our food production. We produce more than enough food today to feed the world’s population, the real problem is distribution. While this is true, it entirely misses the point – the point that Kromdijk and Long now make explicit. It actually misses two points.
...
Remember, we will need to produce 87% more food by 2050, and we cannot simply increase land use 87%. We need to use our land more efficiently.
..."
--------------------------------------------------
Novella Wrote A Great Piece On The Need for Improved Food Production
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-need-for-improved-food-production/He addresses the science denial of climate change deniers and anti-GMOers, showing how the combination might be rather unfortunate.
"...
Some who deny the reality of global climate change have argued that, even if CO2 is increasing in the atmosphere, who is to say it’s a bad thing? Plants breath CO2, so increasing CO2 should just increase plant growth.
Kromdijk and Long point out that this view is naive. This is based on the simplistic thinking that if some is good then more is better (the fallacious basis of the entire supplement industry). In reality, biological systems exist in a complex homeostasis. Further, evolution is very efficient at optimizing biological systems to their current environment. If you rapidly change that environment, there may not be time for evolution to catch up.
...
One of the talking points in the anti-GMO movement is that we do not need to increase our food production. We produce more than enough food today to feed the world’s population, the real problem is distribution. While this is true, it entirely misses the point – the point that Kromdijk and Long now make explicit. It actually misses two points.
...
Remember, we will need to produce 87% more food by 2050, and we cannot simply increase land use 87%. We need to use our land more efficiently.
..."
--------------------------------------------------
April 1, 2016
"It’s April Fools’ day in the US of A. One of the internet traditions is to come up with a story that is weird or unlikely, but not so weird or unlikely that it is not believable, in order to fool people that the story is real.
I gave it the old SBM try, I really did, but I couldn’t do it. I wanted to come up with a SCAM therapy so weird, so unlikely, that I could not find an example of it actually being practiced.
It can’t be done. Like a Trump utterance*, you can’t invent a SCAM (Supplements, Complementary and Alternative Medicine) that someone, somewhere, has already pulled out of, er, well, thin air and are using it on patients.
Of course, what would you expect given that many SCAMs were in fact, pulled out of, er, well thin air. Think chiropractic and DD Palmer, iridology by August von Peczely, and reiki by Mikao Usui. Making up fantastical stuff is what they do.
..."
-------------------------------------------------------------
Alas, I too tried to come up with one to post, but I could not. The actual SCAMs are too darn tricky!
April Fool Cannot Surpass SCAM "Treatments" For Trickery
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/april-fool-cannot-surpass-scam/"It’s April Fools’ day in the US of A. One of the internet traditions is to come up with a story that is weird or unlikely, but not so weird or unlikely that it is not believable, in order to fool people that the story is real.
I gave it the old SBM try, I really did, but I couldn’t do it. I wanted to come up with a SCAM therapy so weird, so unlikely, that I could not find an example of it actually being practiced.
It can’t be done. Like a Trump utterance*, you can’t invent a SCAM (Supplements, Complementary and Alternative Medicine) that someone, somewhere, has already pulled out of, er, well, thin air and are using it on patients.
Of course, what would you expect given that many SCAMs were in fact, pulled out of, er, well thin air. Think chiropractic and DD Palmer, iridology by August von Peczely, and reiki by Mikao Usui. Making up fantastical stuff is what they do.
..."
-------------------------------------------------------------
Alas, I too tried to come up with one to post, but I could not. The actual SCAMs are too darn tricky!
Profile Information
Member since: 2002Number of posts: 35,773
