Daniel Dvorkin @medigoth@qoto.org
Bioinformaticist / biostatistician, veteran medic and infantryman, armchair paleontologist, occasional science fiction author, vaccinated liberal patriot.
Joined Oct 2022
@Mx_EddyNikko @GottaLaff That's a serious kind of power.
@MalthusJohn I'm quoting a Facebook conversation. Happy to provide the link if you want. The first and third quoted paragraphs are mine, the second ("For the history buffs ...") is from someone else. He *pretended* to ask a legitimate question about "what do we do when experts disagree," but was clearly more interested in pushing a narrative than getting an answer.
@failedLyndonLaRouchite But was that result received with mockery, or just disagreement? It's the "they laughed at ..." narrative I'm pushing back against specifically.
@failedLyndonLaRouchite Trust me! (97.3%, ±1.7% CI.)
@failedLyndonLaRouchite Exactly. Relativity tied a bunch of strange results together in an elegant way. The same applies to some of the other examples on my list—e.g. the reason the Alvarez hypothesis gained widespread acceptance relatively quickly is that none of the other proposed mechanisms for the #KPg #extinction (formerly #KT) fit the rather odd data.
@failedLyndonLaRouchite My answer is a qualified yes: the majority of experts are more often closer to correct than anyone else. I'm a statistican, so I'm not going to get any more definitive than that. 🙂
A conversation.
"When experts disagree, usually the best thing to do is listen to what the majority of experts say. There's no *guarantee* that they're right, but they're more likely right than wrong. And if the majority view is overturned, it's almost guaranteed that this will be done by other experts in the field presenting evidence for the minority view, not by random kibitzers."
"For the history buffs in here, while most scientific knowledge is advanced incrementally, the true breakthroughs are usually ridiculed by the reigning experts. That is why appeals to authority are the worst kind of logical fallacy for a scientist."
"That's the pop-history version of scientific progress. The actual #history of #science is very different. Kind of like the difference between 'history buffs' and historians."
===
Yes, there are examples—a few—of genuine breakthroughs that were ridiculed by the scientific establishment of the day. I bet you know what they are, because everyone does. They laughed at #Semmelweis, they laughed at #Wegner, they laughed at Luis and Walter #Alvarez, they laughed at #Marshall and #Warren. These things happened.
But they did *not* laugh at #Galileo: indeed, they took his work with deadly seriousness. (And there really wasn't any such thing as a "scientific establishment" at the time.) They did not laugh at #Newton, or #Watt, or #Darwin, or #Gibbs, or #Pasteur, or #Einstein, or #Curie, or #Heisenberg, or #Fisher, or #Watson and #Crick and poor unacknowledged #Franklin, or #Tharp and #Heezen, or #Ostrom and #Bakker, or #Hansen, or the *vast majority* of scientists whose work has fundamentally changed our understanding of the universe.
At least if by "they" you mean scientists working in relevant fields, who understood the questions at hand ... not, in most cases, scientists from other fields, or those with no scientific experience at all. Nor the religious and political ideologues who muddy the waters by creating fake "controversies" to cast doubt on results they know are true, but cannot accept.
In some cases they *disagreed*, quite vociferously. There were debates that descended into shouting matches, professional disagreements turned into personal feuds, once-eminent researchers become sad cranks, ruined careers and shortened lives. Yes. These things happened too, and that's a tragedy.
But most of the time, most researchers in the same fields as the revolutionaries said, "Oh, that makes sense!" Problems that had seemed insoluble suddenly became simple, or at least it was possible to see how there *might* be an elegant solution. Major discoveries spawned a host of medium-sized ones, each of which in turn spawned endless minor ones—and endless minor papers, academic bread and butter for when you can't get steak and lobster. Everyone wins.
Those ideologues I mentioned above? They really, really want you to believe the narrative of ridicule. You might want to consider why.
@rubinjoni It's been a while since I read the Dune novels, but wasn't the Jihad against AIs themselves? As much as I enjoy Terminator and Battlestar Galactica, like I said I'm not really worried about the machines turning against us. Just humans doing really dumb things with them.
Good look at a bad problem. The author is a friend from grad schol at the #University of #Colorado, where she was a faculty member when I was a grad student. She's since gone on to bigger and better things, and I've gone on to ... well, things.
Anyway. I've never been particularly worried about #Cylons, #Skynet, etc. Humans doing stupid human tricks, and using #AI to do them much faster, OTOH, yeah.
The internet community of anti-science #cranks is an example of #model #collapse happening at human speed. #Antivaxers, #creationists, #climate change #deniers et al. prey on people with legitimate questions about some particular aspect of the broad #consensus. Those people often go down an increasingly loony rabbit hole, and end up propagating the absurdity, sometimes adding their own bizarre spin which their new-found colleagues happily add to the ideology.
If this becomes part of the #academic ecosystem, with AI reviewers approving AI-generated #papers and no human checks on the process, the scholarly corpus will become hopelessly contaminated. I have no idea what to do about that.
So apparently the #RoyalSociety is considering giving #ElonMusk the boot. I am appalled and astonished, not that they're considering kicking him out, but that he was a ever a member in the first place.
"... elected as a fellow of the UK’s national academy of #sciences in 2018 in recognition of his work and impact in the #space and #electric vehicle industries, with some considering him a 'modern #Brunel'."
Isembard Brunel was a genius polymath engineer who built much of the modern world. He also, BTW, lived a reasonably comfortable but not especially wealthy life. His obituary noted archly, "Brunel was the right man for the nation, but unfortunately, he was not the right man for the shareholders."
Musk's odor permeating the halls of the Royal Society proves that eminent scientists are no more immune to fast-talking con artists than anyone else. We non-eminent scientists should take this lesson to heart.
There's been no doubt for some time that we're in the middle of a sixth #mass #extinction. Here are some numbers.
If we're very lucky, we'll stop at the level of the #Devonian extinction, the least severe of the Big Five. More likely we're headed for something on the scale of the #Ordovician or #Triassic. The #Cretaceous is in sight, and the #Permian is not out of reach. From an evolutionary time perspective it will *look* like the Cretaceous, practically as instantaneous as the Big Rock.
I confess, I really like the idea of #corvid #paleontologists digging up the #Anthropocene. Feathers gleaming under badlands dust, exciting cawing as dextrous claws scrape rock away from a flat-faced skull ... But I’m very much not okay with what we’re doing right now to make that happen.
Pop-sci coverage: https://www.forbes.com/sites/grrlscientist/2023/07/19/modern-sixth-mass-extinction-event-will-be-worse-than-first-predicted/
Journal article, open access: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.12974
Seen in the wild: "In the making of #Aliens, James Cameron didn't warn the actors that there was crawl space above the ceiling tiles. He thought the best performance would be captured when real #xenomorphs were let into room, and the actor reactions would be spontaneous and authentic."
#Ukraine now controls something between 500 and 1000 square kilometers of #Russia. The lower estimate is what can be rigorously confirmed by external sources, and the high end is the claim of the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence.
Most likely the #MoD is being ... generous in its use of "control," at least in press releases. But I bet they have a good idea, internally, of where they can put and *keep* boots on the ground. It turns out you can do wonders with a functioning military when front-line commanders can tell their superiors what's actually going on, instead of what those superiors want to hear.
Of course that's very small compared to the amount of Ukraine occupied by Russia, and infinitesimal compared to the amount of Russia occupied by the enemies of the Russian people. It's still a hell of an accomplishment.
Suppose the #US invaded #Mexico, again, and this time failed embarrassingly to take Mexico City in the early days of the war. Then for over two years, US forces could only occupy Baja California and a strip of land south of the Rio Grande, not even along the river's full length. And *then*, Mexican forces took Laredo and Galveston, threatened Houston, and made a serious reconnaissance in force toward the #Alamo just for old times' sake.
I guess the people who use "#invasion" rhetoric for immigration would pretty much freak the hell out—like I'm quite sure a whole lot of Russians are doing right now. Somebody put on popcorn.
#Treason doth sometimes prosper, even when we dare call it treason.
> Fewer Americans today consider childhood #vaccines important, with 40% saying it is extremely important for parents to have their children vaccinated, down from 58% in 2019 and 64% in 2001. There has been a similar decline in the combined "extremely" and "very important" percentage, which was 94% in 2001 but sits at 69% today.
> The declining belief in the importance of vaccines is essentially confined to #Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, as the views of #Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents have changed little over the past 24 years. Twenty-six percent of Republicans and Republican leaners -- half as many as in 2019 -- believe it is extremely important for parents to get their children vaccinated. In the initial Gallup poll on vaccinations, Republicans and Republican leaners (62%) held similar views to Democrats and Democratic leaners (66%); the two groups now differ by 37 percentage points.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/648308/far-fewer-regard-childhood-vaccinations-important.aspx
I may, eventually, make my peace with much of the madness of the last thirty years. Honestly I don't expect it: I probably won't live long enough to see most of the damage undone. But it's at least *possible*. If the upcoming election and all the others go as well as they possibly can, if the Republican Party purges itself of the cult, if the cultists themselves come back to some semblance of reality ... yes. It could happen.
#Antivax, and those who enabled its rise from the grave, I will never forgive. Not now, not in a decade, not in a generation, not in a century or a millennium or the lifetime of the universe.
🎼Take back what I paid
For another #couchfucker in a motorcade ...
This goes in the same bin as #logical and #rational in my frequently used funny-sexy-cool test. Only other people can decide if you're #funny or #sexy or #cool. Not only do you not get to make that judgement about yourself, it's a terrible mistake to try—because the more you announce to people that you are that thing, the less likely they are to see you that way. Show, don't tell.
Many desirable characteristics, including #logic and #rationality and #empathy, work the same way. I *try* to be empathetic, and as far as I can tell from the reactions of the people around me, I succeed most of the time. And I trust many of them to tell me if I'm being a self-centered jerk. But being "an #empath" isn't an inborn characteristic. It's a *behavior*—and like all good behaviors, past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Bioinformaticist / biostatistician, veteran medic and infantryman, armchair paleontologist, occasional science fiction author, vaccinated liberal patriot.
Joined Oct 2022
