Why Science is so Hard to Believe

[sprinkles]

Maybe the venue could be changed to accommodate. There is time after all.

 

[sprinkles]

Also I'm reading over my posts in this thread since page 1, and I've been mostly constructive and nothing like how you haters have tried to paint me on the last two or three pages. I got a little annoyed. Big deal.

I don't deserve the flak I got, you're wrong about me, and I can't be bothered to correct you.

 

[á´…eparted]

Also I'm reading over my posts in this thread since page 1, and I've been mostly constructive and nothing like how you haters have tried to paint me on the last two or three pages. I got a little annoyed. Big deal.

I don't deserve the flak I got, you're wrong about me, and I can't be bothered to correct you.

Well this definitely doesn't help your image at all.

To be perfectly honest I find your manner of speaking on topics like this as pretentious, haughty, snobbish, and needlessly stubborn. To my knowledge you have said you are a high school drop out who ended up working in the dotcom startup industry years back. As such, not involved or well versed in the scientific community. Based off that, and your approach, I have a difficult time taking you seriously even if I agree. It's largely why I have ignored posts you make on this stuff and just let others deal with it.

As such, I can not fault anyone for reacting the way they did to you, and if anything this post of yours justifies their responses

 

[sprinkles]

Well this definitely doesn't help your image at all.

To be perfectly honest I find your manner of speaking on topics like this as pretentious, haughty, snobbish, and needlessly stubborn. To my knowledge you have said you are a high school drop out who ended up working in the dotcom startup industry years back. As such, not involved or well versed in the scientific community. Based off that, and your approach, I have a difficult time taking you seriously even if I agree. It's largely why I have ignored posts you make on this stuff and just let others deal with it.

As such, I can not fault anyone for reacting the way they did to you, and if anything this post of yours justifies their responses

The point I was trying to get across is that anyone can do science and that it isn't actually pretentious, but people make it so.

You either dedicate to understanding it or you don't. There really is no 'field'. Where were the scientists before there were scientists?

I can be pretentious, overbearing, nasty and rude. I admit it. But when people accuse me of things I did not say, and put words in my mouth, they go too far.

 

[sprinkles]

[MENTION=20829]Hard[/MENTION]

Also more to the point, I gave that private information mainly to prove that if I can get into this stuff, then anyone can. But I see how you judge me now for being honest (and I'm the one who is pretentious? seriously?) TBH I don't think understanding science gets any easier than it does now.

If I hadn't been honest people would probably still be liking my posts and kissing my ass. But suddenly now I'm a nobody, and that's how people work, and that is why I don't need you. As far as I'm concerned you prove my points.

And not taking me seriously is a real hoot when I've been tolerating the hell out of some of you for ages now.

 

[á´…eparted]

The point I was trying to get across is that anyone can do science and that it isn't actually pretentious, but people make it so.

You either dedicate to understanding it or you don't. There really is no 'field'. Where were the scientists before there were scientists?

I can be pretentious, overbearing, nasty and rude. I admit it. But when people accuse me of things I did not say, and put words in my mouth, they go too far.

Also more to the point, I gave that private information mainly to prove that if I can get into this stuff, then anyone can. But I see how you judge me now for being honest (and I'm the one who is pretentious? seriously?) TBH I don't think understanding science gets any easier than it does now.

If I hadn't been honest people would probably still be liking my posts and kissing my ass. But suddenly now I'm a nobody, and that's how people work, and that is why I don't need you. As far as I'm concerned you prove my points.

Actually, I don't agree here. Not everyone can do science, and there are points and times where people should not over-involve themselves in matters where they do not have the ability or comprehend what is going on at the levels that are required. The reason for this is it can result in misinformation spreading which, for me and a lot of scientist anyway, is one of the major issues we feel must be combated with. There absolutely is a scientific field. To deny such a thing is actually rather asinine. People can learn to become part of it if they put in the effort and contribute to it in a meaningful manner. I.E. by working in the profession, working as a professional advocate, etc. Outside of those sorts of realms is merely a public position. As has been discussed it is their responsibility to stay educated. Or, stay out of it and not try to battle something they do not understand.

As far as being rude, being pushed against is not an excuse for doing so. It ultimately ends up appearing like a temper tantrum a lot of the time.

I understand you gave that information to prove a point. The only time I will judge someone for their credentials (or lack their of) is when their behavior, knowledge, arguments and what not back up what they have/don't have. In your case, it appears to me like you are more informed than most would with your level of knowledge. However, as I said it does appear somewhat out of touch and your lack of being in the scientific field explains why that it is. I'm not judging you in a good or bad way in that regard, it simply explains what is observed. If you want to take offense from that then that's your prerogative.

If I like a post, it's because I like a post. It's as simple as that and it seems like most people here follow that notion. You've said things that I occasionally agree with, at other times I don't. With that said, you approach this topic so aggressively with a lot of underboiled anger that I really have just been unable to make sense of. It think that is what some people might be getting upset with.

But as far as tone. If you come across like a butthurt jerk, then people are going to treat you like a butthurt jerk, and you shouldn't expect anything else from that. In a way it's ironic; one of the issues brought up as the basis for this thread is the manner in which science and information needs to be communicated. It's really important. The way in which you converse with others, matters as well. If it comes across wrong, it won't be taken in by others properly or the ways in which you want, no matter how correct or incorrect it is.

And not taking me seriously is a real hoot when I've been tolerating the hell out of some of you for ages now.

Ok this is just pathetic. Just because you "tolerate" us, means we have to tolerate you? Nuh uh, that's not how it works, and this sort of guilt tripping actually works against what you would be trying to seek. No one's gonna take you seriously. Besides, no one is a mind-reader and is not able to divine if someone is tolerating another person or not. It's therefore illogical to expect such a thing in which they can not see or know without being informed.

 

[sprinkles]

Actually, I don't agree here. Not everyone can do science, and there are points and times where people should not over-involve themselves in matters where they do not have the ability or comprehend what is going on at the levels that are required. The reason for this is it can result in misinformation spreading which, for me and a lot of scientist anyway, is one of the major issues we feel must be combated with. There absolutely is a scientific field. To deny such a thing is actually rather asinine. People can learn to become part of it if they put in the effort and contribute to it in a meaningful manner. I.E. by working in the profession, working as a professional advocate, etc. Outside of those sorts of realms is merely a public position. As has been discussed it is their responsibility to stay educated. Or, stay out of it and not try to battle something they do not understand.

As far as being rude, being pushed against is not an excuse for doing so. It ultimately ends up appearing like a temper tantrum a lot of the time.

I understand you gave that information to prove a point. The only time I will judge someone for their credentials (or lack their of) is when their behavior, knowledge, arguments and what not back up what they have/don't have. In your case, it appears to me like you are more informed than most would with your level of knowledge. However, as I said it does appear somewhat out of touch and your lack of being in the scientific field explains why that it is. I'm not judging you in a good or bad way in that regard, it simply explains what is observed. If you want to take offense from that then that's your prerogative.

If I like a post, it's because I like a post. It's as simple as that and it seems like most people here follow that notion. You've said things that I occasionally agree with, at other times I don't. With that said, you approach this topic so aggressively with a lot of underboiled anger that I really have just been unable to make sense of. It think that is what some people might be getting upset with.

But as far as tone. If you come across like a butthurt jerk, then people are going to treat you like a butthurt jerk, and you shouldn't expect anything else from that. In a way it's ironic; one of the issues brought up as the basis for this thread is the manner in which science and information needs to be communicated. It's really important. The way in which you converse with others, matters as well. If it comes across wrong, it won't be taken in by others properly or the ways in which you want, no matter how correct or incorrect it is.



Ok this is just pathetic. Just because you "tolerate" us, means we have to tolerate you? Nuh uh, that's not how it works, and this sort of guilt tripping actually works against what you would be trying to seek. No one's gonna take you seriously. Besides, no one is a mind-reader and is not able to divine if someone is tolerating another person or not. It's therefore illogical to expect such a thing in which they can not see or know without being informed.

You're speaking to me with sense and I can totally appreciate that. You make valid points here.

However it may or may not matter as I've just requested a ban for myself.

 

[Avocado]

You're speaking to me with sense and I can totally appreciate that. You make valid points here.

However it may or may not matter as I've just requested a ban for myself.

Why? Just take a vacation if you don't want to stay with us...
I'll be glad to welcome you back when you are ready.

 

[sprinkles]

Why? Just take a vacation if you don't want to stay with us...
I'll be glad to welcome you back when you are ready.

I thought what I did was bad enough to warrant it.

I was told by a mod that it's not that bad and I didn't actually break any rules.

I accept this decision. The end. Let it lie please.

 

[Jaguar]

Sprinkles dropped out of school, so what? Food for thought:

Richard Branson - Virgin Group

As a child, Richard Branson struggled with dyslexia throughout his school years. After finding difficulty adjusting to numerous schools, he dropped out at the age of 16 to start his own youth culture magazine, called "Student." After moving to London in the mid-1960s, Branson developed his idea for a mail-order record company to help fund his magazine efforts, which he named Virgin.

Using a public phone box as his first office, Branson managed to sell records at significantly reduced prices. The venture proved highly successful, allowing Branson to expand the business with a record shop on Oxford Street. Over the coming decades, Branson would add an airline, drinks manufacturer and dozens of other ventures to his Virgin Group.

Gates, Jobs, and Ellison all dropped out of college.

As for the rest of this thread, seriously, wtf? It's like watching woodpeckers peck a tree to death. Is there really a point?

 

[Xander]

As for the rest of this thread, seriously, wtf? It's like watching woodpeckers peck a tree to death. Is there really a point?

To find the bit which cannot be broken by pecking.

 

[Coriolis]

No. Sci-fi is entertainment and is a lot of times damaging to science.

That depends on how accurate the science part is. SF can certainly inspire interest in science, and I think that is the hardest job since once interested, a person will look for more information and not be satisfied with drivel and error. People who indulge in "recreational science" do things like launch rockets in their backyards, observe the night sky with a home telescope, play around with arduinos, or even get into the chemistry of things like cooking or winemaking.

No. Science is not about enjoyable conversations and showing intelligence (scientists don't actually care about nerd cred all that much)

It's supposed to be dry and technical. And besides, this thread is about difference in opinion, not about being included in the scientific community. Being more inclusive does not necessarily solve the issue.

Science certainly is technical, but if it is dry, that indicates a poor communication style on the part of the person describing it. Sadly much of technical writing is like this, but it needn't be, and the fact that it is so is not a commentary on the subject matter itself. As for conversations, I find science provides an endless supply of enjoyable, stimulating, and informative conversations. That is one of the everyday joys of being a scientist. You are right about the "nerd cred", though.

 

[á´…eparted]

As for conversations, I find science provides an endless supply of enjoyable, stimulating, and informative conversations. That is one of the everyday joys of being a scientist. You are right about the "nerd cred", though.

I can not emphasize this enough.

If a scientist doesn't find it stimulating to talk about in and outside of a work context, then they are in the wrong field and will likely not last very long. Actually doing science is hard and rather demoralizing at times because all of the countless things that don't work (it's the nature of the beast and part of the process). Without the excitement and joy they find in science, it's very difficult if not impossible to slog through it.

I don't think I have ever met a scientist who didn't enjoy talking about science. In and out of their field. Not every aspect of it of course, but a large portion of it.

 

[sprinkles]

That depends on how accurate the science part is. SF can certainly inspire interest in science, and I think that is the hardest job since once interested, a person will look for more information and not be satisfied with drivel and error. People who indulge in "recreational science" do things like launch rockets in their backyards, observe the night sky with a home telescope, play around with arduinos, or even get into the chemistry of things like cooking or winemaking.


Science certainly is technical, but if it is dry, that indicates a poor communication style on the part of the person describing it. Sadly much of technical writing is like this, but it needn't be, and the fact that it is so is not a commentary on the subject matter itself. As for conversations, I find science provides an endless supply of enjoyable, stimulating, and informative conversations. That is one of the everyday joys of being a scientist. You are right about the "nerd cred", though.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that a scientist can't enjoy sci-fi. I'm not saying that science can't be inspiring.

I'm not saying that science can't be fun, I'm not saying that you shouldn't ever enjoy it, and I'm not saying you shouldn't find entertainment value in it.

What I AM saying is don't let these things get in your way of doing good science.

 

[sprinkles]

[MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION]

Or to make a parallel: it's ok to watch a medical drama and be inspired and appreciate what surgeons do, and strive to be a surgeon yourself one day. It is not ok to watch a medical drama and think you're somehow in on it. That is very dangerous.

Science is at least more forgiving in that there are a lot of experiments that you can try without killing people, especially in computer sciences and electronics if you have the dosh for things.

"In the discovery of secret things and in the investigation of hidden causes, stronger reasons are obtained from sure experiments and demonstrated arguments than from probable conjectures and the opinions of philosophical speculators of the common sort." ~ William Gilbert

 

[Qlip]

It's easy to forget that Science is very non-intuitive. Even with all of this education on the sciences, on reasoning and maths, I suspect that most people only get out of it what they manage to find useful in everyday life. Everyday people on the whole need to know pretty much nothing about scientific method, physics and logic.

A large amount of people who love the sciences think of it essentially as a form of neato magic, the end results being colorful displays of whizzbang dazzle. And, honestly, I feel that this is reasonable. As an idealist, even I can recognize that the idea of 'informed citizen' is pie-in-the-sky.

 

[sprinkles]

[MENTION=9811]Coriolis[/MENTION]

Additionally I would argue that dry information is efficient information and I could trivially back this up based on computational requirements.

How much 'salt' a person thinks they need in their information in order to digest it comes down to personal preference, but when it comes to the information itself, straight up is the best way to transmit it.

Edit:
Also most of you guys appear to be intermingling science into life and the social circus, and meanwhile I'm separating it from the same.

 

[Eluded_One]

Science

end of story

 

[sprinkles]

[MENTION=20829]Hard[/MENTION]

Also I have an explanation for EVERYTHING I have said in this thread.

If there's some reasoning of mine that you don't understand, I can expound on it if you wish. You talk about not being a mind reader, well neither am I. If you don't want to understand me then I won't make you. If you want to, I CAN try to explain. But if you automatically write me off then I'll be a lot less inclined to do so.

 

[Coriolis]

Or to make a parallel: it's ok to watch a medical drama and be inspired and appreciate what surgeons do, and strive to be a surgeon yourself one day. It is not ok to watch a medical drama and think you're somehow in on it. That is very dangerous.

Science is at least more forgiving in that there are a lot of experiments that you can try without killing people, especially in computer sciences and electronics if you have the dosh for things.

That's why I wrote, "People who indulge in 'recreational science' do things like launch rockets in their backyards, observe the night sky with a home telescope, play around with arduinos, or even get into the chemistry of things like cooking or winemaking." Sci-Fi, medical dramas, etc. are more to motivate interest and set people on the path to learning more. Ideally, though, they will be well-researched enough that the technical or medical content is at least accurate, so viewers or readers don't learn things wrong.

It's easy to forget that Science is very non-intuitive. Even with all of this education on the sciences, on reasoning and maths, I suspect that most people only get out of it what they manage to find useful in everyday life. Everyday people on the whole need to know pretty much nothing about scientific method, physics and logic.

I disagree. Scientific inquiry, or put more simply, figuring out how things really work, is part of human nature. Small children generally exhibit it spontaneously. Then grown-ups and schools extinguish it with rules, requirements, procedures, and "how things are supposed to be done". All science education should have to do is get students (or adults) to rediscover their original childhood curiosity.

Of course science as a profession is much more involved than this, but this is where it starts. For some people it leads them to careers in science. For the rest, it should persist as a curiosity about the world around them that will only be satisfied by the facts. Yes, this will relate most directly to their everyday life, but for the average non-scientist, it would be more than enough to understand even that.

Additionally I would argue that dry information is efficient information and I could trivially back this up based on computational requirements.

How much 'salt' a person thinks they need in their information in order to digest it comes down to personal preference, but when it comes to the information itself, straight up is the best way to transmit it.

Edit:
Also most of you guys appear to be intermingling science into life and the social circus, and meanwhile I'm separating it from the same.

No. Efficient information is concise. Part of what makes technical communication dry and boring is that it is needlessly verbose and convoluted, NOT efficient or concise. When the ideas leap from a page, unencumbered by needless verbiage and presented with the minimal, exact vocabulary, it is stark in its significance, and far from dry.

Moreover, science is part of life, and should be. See comments above.