10 minutes ago, TKDfella said:

Another point that is also useful is one's own retention of what one learned at secondary/high school/technical level. CaMP, Chemistry, mathematics and physics. Most of us have done this but unfortunately it may get lost later (various reasons) but such a foundation can give one a basic idea of how things should proceed. See something that contradicts your understanding is a time to check and re-check

Yes.  Some have forgotten what we learned in school. For example, the rule about staring at a solar eclipse. 
 

7 minutes ago, LarrySR said:

Yes.  Some have forgotten what we learned in school. For example, the rule about staring at a solar eclipse. 
 

Off topic...not about conspiracy...but a mistake.

11 minutes ago, TKDfella said:

Off topic...not about conspiracy...but a mistake.

Not off topic. It’s about not believing in science, a hallmark of the garden variety conspiracy crackpot. 

3 hours ago, LarrySR said:

Not off topic. It’s about not believing in science, a hallmark of the garden variety conspiracy crackpot. 

Citing a political figure? Somehow I wonder about your motives.

 

13 hours ago, ozimoron said:

I didn't say it was the only factor but lack of qualifications in the field is a big red flag. For example, a retired nurse commenting on covid vaccines is likely to get a pass from me.

Yes - my mother was a physiotherapist with the NHS - and considered a leading authority in her field. A lot of my family were doctors and nurses too, but the one thing they were all in agreement on was NEVER take the advice of a nurse or physio  - they are only partially informed.

e.g. "Ooooh, that looks bad, the last person to come in here with one of those was dead in a week"

 

There is also the conundrum of how apparently "clever" people can get taken in by completely fallacious concepts. they buy into ideas that just aren't true. It appears because they are above average intelligence they ae very good at cherry-picking evidence to back up their beliefs.

 

9 hours ago, LarrySR said:

Yes.  Some have forgotten what we learned in school. For example, the rule about staring at a solar eclipse. 
 

Yes - point at airplanes and throw bread at helicopters

4 hours ago, Marcomilton7 said:

 

Swear to the bible?? This is the same thinking that brought about Brexit.

If you remember anything about O level physics you will laugh at the "fake moon-landing" lobby.

On 12/5/2021 at 11:11 AM, HashBrownHarry said:

Everyone has their own opinions and ideas, that's what makes life 'interesting'

 

Perhaps a move to N Korea to become drones with the rest of the population there?

Not really. If I claimed you were a mass murderer or a paedophile and assuming as I do that you aren't then it would be wrong for anyone to give as much weight to my argument as your innocence. You'd also be quite right to criticise me for making such a claim regardless of whether it's my opinion or not.

I think if people learned to do arithmetic rather than how to "think critically" would help a lot. 

 

People have been spouting "question authority" for as long as I can remember, but now those same people seem to be demanding that not question authority, how funny is that? 

 

 

17 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I think if people learned to do arithmetic rather than how to "think critically" would help a lot. 

 

People have been spouting "question authority" for as long as I can remember, but now those same people seem to be demanding that not question authority, how funny is that? 

 

 

question authority isn't the same as question experts

 

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

question authority isn't the same as question experts

 

It does when the "experts" are on the payroll of the authorities...

 

In any event, why should we not question experts?

55 minutes ago, kimamey said:

Not really. If I claimed you were a mass murderer or a paedophile and assuming as I do that you aren't then it would be wrong for anyone to give as much weight to my argument as your innocence. You'd also be quite right to criticise me for making such a claim regardless of whether it's my opinion or not.

If you thought i was a mass murdered or paedo, that's up to you, it's your opinion.

2 minutes ago, HashBrownHarry said:

If you thought i was a mass murdered or paedo, that's up to you, it's your opinion.

There is a big difference between an opinion and a claim.

 

8 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

There is a big difference between an opinion and a claim.

 

Hello.

 

Ok - thanks.

7 minutes ago, HashBrownHarry said:

Hello.

 

Ok - thanks.

No problem, I get confused from time to time as well. 

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

No problem, I get confused from time to time as well. 

I'm always confused.

1 minute ago, HashBrownHarry said:

I'm always confused.

I noticed 

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

I noticed 

Well done, sharp as a bowling ball.

4 minutes ago, HashBrownHarry said:

Well done, sharp as a bowling ball.

"I'm rubber, you're glue. What you say bounces off me and sticks to you."

 

Or how about: "I know you are, but what am I?"

 

 

57 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

It does when the "experts" are on the payroll of the authorities...

 

In any event, why should we not question experts?

I would if they weren't peer reviewed and more qualified than myself. Or if there was significant push back from other credible experts. Absent those conditions I see no basis on which to question them.

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

I think if people learned to do arithmetic rather than how to "think critically" would help a lot. 

 

People have been spouting "question authority" for as long as I can remember, but now those same people seem to be demanding that not question authority, how funny is that? 

 

 

You need to look at what critical thinking is. It's based on "skepticality" - and maths would be a sub-section of critical thinking.

The basis of ALL critical thinking/science is to question authority.

What critical thinking does is set out a logical system from questioning authority. Not mere gainsaying

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

It does when the "experts" are on the payroll of the authorities...

That is the basis for a conspiracy theory.

You understand it differently than I do.

 

What does "septicality" mean, and what are "mats"?

On 12/5/2021 at 11:11 AM, HashBrownHarry said:

Everyone has their own opinions and ideas, that's what makes life 'interesting'

 

Perhaps a move to N Korea to become drones with the rest of the population there?

Sorry, but I would disagree with segmentthe first part on grounds that it is not necessarily an "opinion"

the second part is an example of this.

 

 

“You’re entitled to your own opinion” or “I'm entitled to my opinion” or “I have a right to my opinion “is an informal fallacy in which a person discredits any opposition by claiming that they are entitled to their opinion

 

Opinions are traditionally formed using evidence logic and reason – often people using forms of this expression have none of this to back up their statement. It often is associated with “let’s agree to disagree”

Claiming this as an “entitlement” or right is irrelevant to whether their argument is true or false.

It’s a denial of reason and logic… or an admittance by a person that they have no more counter-argument. it is often used to defend factually indefensible positions – the “right not to be right”

7 minutes ago, Thunglom said:

That is the basis for a conspiracy theory.

So being skeptical of a study that shows man made climate change is a hoax because it is funded by the petroleum industry makes one a conspiracy theorist? 

8 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

You understand it differently than I do.

 

What does "septicality" mean, and what are "mats"?

I'm surprised you can't work out typos - but I've changed them for your convenience.

8 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So being skeptical of a study that shows man made climate change is a hoax because it is funded by the petroleum industry makes one a conspiracy theorist? 

Ah - you don't understand the basic concept of critical thinking i.e. "skepticality" - If you use skepticality correctly - as a scientific tool - you will be able to do a peer review of such a paper and show it's flaws.

Constant review and skepticality is how science works,  it involves verifiable proof. Maths even.

You then put forward you opinion using the verifiable evidence.

the system first grew up with philosophy and science but recently scientists like Stephen Hawking have suggested that the philosophy side is no longer needed and science methodologies are able to answer these questions.

7 minutes ago, Thunglom said:

I'm surprised you can't work out typos - but I've changed them for your convenience.

Why does that surprise you?

6 minutes ago, Thunglom said:

Ah - you don't understand the basic concept of critical thinking i.e. "skepticality" ,,,

You changed the subject. I thought we were talking about conspiracy theories.