1/2 The purpose of general eduction science is to teach students science literacy and critical thinking, yet many courses focus on facts. Science isn’t just what we know, it’s how we know.
There is a better way: Teach skills, not facts.
Scientific debates don’t happen in the public. Scientists debate other experts constantly in the literature & at conferences.
A hallmark of pseudoscience to bypass the scientific community and go to the public. Don’t be fooled: the “debate” they’re suggesting isn’t scientific.
@CaulfieldTim
If you’re going to trust your doctors enough to take your heart out of your chest and replace it with someone else’s, you might also consider trusting them when they tell you to get vaccinated.
I’ve asked my students what homeopathy is, and they generally say “natural” and/or “herbal” medicine.
Homeopathy’s biggest superpower is that almost no one knows what it is… which means its kryptonite is education. 👊😊
More:
Scientific debates aren’t private. Go to a conference or read journals. A foundation of science is subjecting your evidence to other experts for critical scrutiny.
A public “debate” with someone who doesn’t have expertise isn’t science. It’s a publicity stunt.
The ad hominem is one of the most common fallacies used to try to discredit scientists.
They are often used by those who lack evidence, so they resort to emotional attacks.
Bottom line: Ad hominems are lazy “arguments,” so don’t use them!
Characteristic of Pseudoscience
#10
: Lacks adequate peer review: Avoids critical scrutiny by the scientific community
Since most PS wouldn’t pass peer review, promoters often go directly to the public, via books, websites, social media, TV shows...
I’ve asked my students what homeopathy is, and they generally say “natural” and/or “herbal” medicine.
Just as I thought: Homeopathy’s biggest superpower is that almost no one knows what it is.
MORE:
@littlewhitty
As someone who teaches prerequisite courses for nursing, it’s my opinion that there’s very little education in process of science. While they’re taught many “facts” of science, they’re not taught how we learned those “facts.” So basically, there’s a lack of science literacy.
Be wary of “doing your own research.”
Research is a systematic process of trying to prove yourself wrong, not searching for “evidence” that confirms our beliefs.
The more motivated we are, the more “evidence” we’ll find. We’ll be very overconfident but wrong.
-
@citycyclops
According to
#AaronRogers
, “If science can’t be questioned, it’s not science anymore; it’s propaganda…That’s the truth.”
If you’re not listening to the answers science provides, it’s not critical thinking anymore; it’s denial…That’s the truth.
There. Fixed it.
“Just asking questions” (JAQ-ing) allows a questioner to make assertions while avoiding the burden of proof.
There’s nothing wrong with asking questions…but you have to be willing to accept the answer.
Comic:
@Explosm
So excited that my toolkit FLOATER is the feature article in the March/April
@SkeptInquirer
!
Read more about staying afloat in a sea of misinformation:
Avoiding bias is a laudable goal. But there aren’t always “two sides” to every story.
Giving equal weight to an unsupported position is a false balance, & it can mislead & confuse the audience. 1/2
Dunning-Kruger effect: Overconfidence due to limited knowledge or abilities. Basically, the skills and knowledge required to be competent are the same as those needed to evaluate one’s own competence.
More:
“In many cases, incompetence does not leave people disoriented, perplexed, or cautious. Instead, the incompetent are often blessed with an inappropriate confidence, buoyed by something that feels to them like knowledge.” -
@daviddunning6
Comic:
@MuchCoffee
“Big Pharma” has to demonstrate that its products are effective and safe, and that what’s on the label is what’s in the bottle.
“Big Placebo” is after your money, too, without those pesky details standing in their way.
More:
I’m often asked why I cover pseudoscience in science class.
Understanding how easily we are fooled is central to recognizing why we need science. And PS is a great way to help students recognize good science.
“Teach Skills, Not Facts”
#SaganSaturday
“Big Pharma”: Spends 10 years, $2.5b testing meds for safety & efficacy; products quality-controlled & govt-regulated.
“Big Homeopathy”: No testing or regulation. Sells boxes of sugar pills for $30 while convincing consumers “Big Pharma” is after their money.
Comic: Edwin Tan
There aren’t always two sides to every story.
Giving equal weight to an unsupported position is a false balance, and it can mislead the audience.
Not platforming an unsupported position isn’t censorship. There’s no conspiracy. It’s just good journalism.
Comic:
@crankyuncles
Carl Sagan’s “dragon in my garage” beautifully explains skepticism & falsifiability.
Learn more: “Why trying to prove yourself wrong is they key to being right”
If you find yourself explaining to experts why they’re wrong — because it’s so simple and obvious to you — consider the (strong) possibility that it might be you who’s wrong.
Flow chart:
@StartsWithABang
@jonathanstea
She’s very brave. Not only did she change her mind about one of her important beliefs, she did so publicly.
It’s something we can all learn from. 😊
Conspiracy theories are self-sealing:
-Missing evidence was hidden
-Contradictory evidence was planted
There’s also a double standard:
-“Official” sources can’t be trusted
-A random dude on youtube knows the “truth”
What’s most important is maintaining the narrative.
I asked my class yesterday what homeopathy was.
Their answers were telling: Natural and herbal.
Just as I thought: Homeopathy’s biggest superpower is that almost no one knows what it is.
#WorldHomeopathyWeek
“Doing your own research”: A short thread with useful resources.
Nearly everyone is “doing their own research” these days. And it’s understandable: we want to make good decisions & we have access to endless amounts of info. Besides, what’s wrong with making up our own mind? 1/4
The Opinion Shield is often used to protect unsupported assertions. We simply don’t want to be wrong.
We may be legally “entitled to our opinions,” but that doesn’t mean we’re right, or that our opinions are equal to those of experts.
The existence of a scientific consensus doesn’t mean science can’t be questioned.
On the contrary: a consensus is what survived rigorous questioning by experts.
Internet “experts” either don’t realize their questions have been answered…or they don’t like the answers.
This argument is basically: The consensus doesn’t support what I want to believe, so scientists haven’t considered my position.
It fails to understand how science works. Scientists question science ALL the time, so what’s more likely is: I don’t know what scientists know.
Skepticism is being open to all claims, but demanding sufficient evidence before accepting them. Claims made without evidence can be rejected without evidence (Hitchen’s razor), and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence (Sagan standard).
Quote: David Hume
Misinformation can result in false knowledge. Even worse, once it’s there it can be difficult to dislodge.
Don’t fool yourself into thinking you can’t be fooled. (We all can.) The best thing you can do is avoid seeing misinformation in the first place.
Quote:
@jonathanstea
#Ivermectin
may kill
#COVID
in Petri dishes at high enough doses.
But it’s easy to kill things in Petri dishes. The key is to keep the body alive and healthy.
#GetVaccinated
Carl Sagan’s “dragon in my garage” beautifully explains skepticism & falsifiability.
We often protect important beliefs by explaining away evidence that would prove them wrong.
My article, “Teach Skills, Not Facts,” is out in Skeptical Inquirer!
If the purpose of general eduction science is to teach students science literacy and critical thinking, why do most courses teach content?
Is there a better way?
VAERS acts as an early warning system for experts to identify potential safety issues.
However, it consists of incidents people voluntarily report after vaccination. It’s raw, unverified data.
And it can be greatly misunderstood & misused.
This thread brilliantly explains why
The Opinion Shield is often used to protect unsupported assertions. We simply don’t want to be wrong.
We may be “entitled to our opinions,” but that doesn’t mean we’re right, or that our opinions are equal to those of experts.
If your “research” leads you to sources that tell you the experts are all mistaken or lying, you’re doing it wrong. You haven’t found trustworthy sources the experts have all missed. You’ve been misled by propaganda that appealed to your emotions or biases.
Too many fool themselves into thinking they’re being “scientific” by “questioning the science.”
It’s true that questioning is central to the process of science. But not accepting the answers is denial.
Avoiding bias is a laudable goal. But there aren’t always “two sides” to every story.
Giving equal weight to an unsupported position is a false balance, & it can mislead & confuse the audience. 1/2
If 10 electricians said my house was in danger of a fire, but a plumber disagreed, I’d fix the wiring.
If 50 liver specialists said my child needed a transplant, but a massage therapist disagreed, I’d get the transplant.
Learn to trust experts. They know more than you.
One of the most important & difficult hurdles to thinking critically is recognizing the limits of anecdotal evidence.
1. We can misperceive our experiences.
2. Anecdotes aren’t controlled.
3. Anecdotes often aren’t typical.
4. People can lie.
MORE:
I covered homeopathy in class yesterday.
Student, holding a water bottle, baffled look on his face: “You mean this water has memory? Uh, how would that work?”
Homeopathy can’t survive an explanation of its claims. So let’s keep telling people what it really is.
I’ve asked my students what homeopathy is, and they generally say “natural” and/or “herbal” medicine.
Just as I thought: Homeopathy’s biggest superpower is that almost no one knows what it is.
MORE:
“I don’t know.” It can be scary to admit we don’t know. But these three little words are powerful.
They demonstrate humility and maturity.
They free us from the pressure of having to know everything.
They allow us to learn.
Let’s normalize saying “I don’t know.”
Like
#AaronRogers
, we all like to think of ourselves as critical thinkers.
But be wary of pseudo-critical thinking. If you’re convinced you used “evidence” & “know the truth,” why would you entertain the possibility you’re wrong & re-think?
Article:
Charles Darwin was born on February 12, 1809. Fifty years later he finally published On the Origin of Species, which ends in this beautiful and inspiring sentence.
Happy
#DarwinDay
. There is grandeur in this view of life. 🥰
Everyone thinks “science” is on their side…and the more we want to believe the better we are at finding “evidence.”
Knowing the characteristics of pseudoscience isn’t enough. We also have to be honest with ourselves & be willing to question our beliefs.
Many anti-vaccine arguments commit the appeal to nature fallacy.
Nature isn’t always better…or safer. And unfortunately, nature can easily kill you.
#Covid
#VaccinesWork
#ScienceUpFirst
Anecdotes can be compelling. They’re also easy & cheap.
But there’s a reason scientists don’t place a very high value on personal experiences.
The use of anecdotal evidence in place of well-designed studies is a hallmark of pseudoscience. So don’t be fooled.
Confirmation bias: Tendency to search for, interpret, & remember info that confirms our beliefs.
CB is the “mother of all biases,” constantly filtering reality to reinforce our existing beliefs.
More:
Facts may not care about our feelings. But it’s also true that our feelings don’t care about facts.
We may think we’re reasoning, but we’re rationalizing… acting like lawyers to find facts to make our case.
Don’t let emotions override your ability to think critically.
The human brain has an amazing ability to deny what it doesn’t want to believe. We act like lawyers trying to make our case instead of logically following evidence to a conclusion.
And there’s literally nothing we can’t deny if our motivation is strong enough.
🧵Addressing common misconceptions about science
1. There is no single “scientific method”: The recipe-like “scientific method” presented in countless textbooks is at best an oversimplification and at worst…wrong. There are endless ways to collect and evaluate evidence.
I’ve asked my students what homeopathy is, and they generally say “natural” and/or “herbal” medicine.
Homeopathy’s biggest superpower is that almost no one knows what it is… which means its kryptonite is education. 👊😊
More:
🧵Science denial is the refusal to accept established science. The techniques can be summarized by the acronym FLICC: -Fake experts
-Logical fallacies
-Impossible expectations
-Cherry picking
-Conspiracy theories
1/n Many thanks
@mehdirhasan
@MehdiHasanShow
for hosting me this evening I explained the problems of “debating” science on Joe Rogan with RFK Jr and there are several.
What’s wrong with “doing your own research”?
It requires expertise in the area you’re researching.
Confirmation bias, misplaced trust, limited knowledge, & overconfidence is the perfect storm for being misled.
Instead, trust the expert consensus.
Science denialists and pseudoscience promoters have a double standard for evidence. When they want to believe the standard is very low. But when they don't want to believe to standard is impossibly high.
Be wary of “doing your own research.”
Research is a process of trying to find out what’s true.
It’s not searching for “evidence” to confirm our existing beliefs.
The more motivated we are the more “evidence” we’ll find. We’ll be very overconfident but wrong.
#AaronRodgers
The argument from ignorance fallacy essentially states: “We don’t know it’s not true, so it must be true!”
Claims require supporting evidence. A lack of evidence simply means we don’t know.
More fallacies:
While false balance often results from an attempt at impartiality, the irony is that the “balance” results in bias.
Not giving equal weight to an unsupported position isn’t censorship. There’s no conspiracy.
It’s just good journalism. 2/2
In daily usage, a theory is a guess.
But in science, a theory is exactly the opposite — it’s a broad explanation that’s supported by a vast amount of evidence.
So don’t be fooled when someone says “it’s just a theory.”
#ScienceLiteracy
#Science
Those who deny science like to think of themselves as critical thinkers who are “questioning the science.” They may even call themselves skeptics.
But refusing to accept well-supported scientific conclusions isn’t critical thinking, skepticism, or science. It’s denial.
We can easily be misled by our personal experiences. So if well-designed studies have demonstrated that an alternative treatment doesn’t work - but it “worked” for you - trust the study…not yourself.
#ScienceUpFirst
#ScienceForLife
More:
You’re not being “forced” get vaccinated. No one is going to hold you down and put a needle in your arm.
You have the “freedom” to choose: if you don’t want to get vaccinated, then don’t.
But all choices have consequences.
#Freedom
#Vaccines
“Alternative” medicine hasn’t been shown to be effective - or it would be medicine.
Yet many use AM because it “works for them.”
There are many ways can we fool ourselves into thinking treatments work…when they don’t.
Carl Sagan’s “The Demon-Haunted World” is one of the best science and skepticism books of all time.
If you haven’t read it yet, it should be at the top of your reading list.
#Saganisms
#SaganSunday
#CarlSagan
#ScienceForLife
: Day 14:
#CriticalThinking
is empowering
Everyone thinks…& everyone thinks they’re good at thinking.
But good thinking is hard & it doesn’t come naturally. It’s a skill that has to be learned & practiced.
Reading:
If you’ve tried alternative medicine and it “worked for you”, there’s a strong chance you’ve experienced the placebo effect.
While there’s value to “feeling better”, it’s important to be aware of some potential harms of using placebos as medicine.
Believing without evidence doesn’t make you open-minded.
Requiring evidence to believe doesn’t make you close-minded.
We want to have an open mind, but not so open our brains fall out.
-Walter Kotschnig
Alternative Medicine: The Harm of Big Placebo
After learning alternative treatments are placebos, many say, “But I felt better.” I get it…the placebo effect is real. But that doesn’t mean they’re harmless.
Article:
#ScienceUpFirst
#ScienceForLife
A common misunderstanding among those denying well-supported scientific conclusions is that it hasn’t been “proven.”
Science doesn’t result in proof: it’s a process of reducing uncertainty.
But that doesn’t mean science doesn’t know anything!
Science’s pretenders masquerade as science but don’t adhere to the process that makes science reliable.
-Science denial - refusal to accept well-established science.
-Pseudoscience - promotion of a non-scientific “theory.”
Article:
#ScienceForLife
We rely on the consensus of experts in every aspect of our daily lives.
Yet when the consensus conflicts with desired beliefs, we decide they’re lying or conspiring…or we know more than they do…or science doesn’t work via consensus…
They aren’t. You don’t. And it does.
#ScienceForLife
: Day 13: Anecdotes aren’t good evidence
1 We can misperceive our experiences.
2 Anecdotes aren’t controlled.
3 They’re often not typical.
4 People can lie.
Our brains prefer stories over statistics. But be skeptical!
Reading:
Science doesn’t provide absolute certainty: it reduces uncertainty as evidence accumulates. This isn’t a bug - it’s a feature. There’s always the possibility that we’re wrong, so we leave ourselves open to changing our minds with new evidence.
Twitter is abuzz with a claim that
@PeterHotez
is worth $35 mill, which apparently proves he’s untrustworthy.
We don’t know if the claim is true. Hopefully it will be fact-checked soon.
But if net worth is a measure of trustworthiness,
@joerogan
and Kennedy are even wealthier.