Voyaging on That River in Egypt

I guess I've been bored, because I've been arguing with the climate change denialists again. Most of those I talk to are actually quite well-informed. They know a great deal. The only problem is that much of what they know isn't so. One of the things that always strikes me is their reaction to evidence. Any contrary evidence, even or perhaps especially if it's published in a major journal is dismissed as part of the conspiracy. Argument or evidence fitting their prejudices, on the other hand, is accepted as gold even if it comes from a teen-aged half-wit with a blog (poetic exaggeration, maybe).

Anosognosia - "lack of insight" or "lack of awareness" - is believed to be the single largest reason why individuals with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder do not take their medications. A result of anatomical damage to the brain, it affects approximately 50% of individuals with schizophrenia and 40% of individuals with bipolar disorder.

Dealing with the denialist reminds me of dealing with individuals with psychosis. There is a remarkable lack of insight into the fragility of their own evidence. Arguments against are first ignored, next met with diversionary tactics ("but what about the really cold day they once had in Edmonton, Alberta. Doesn't that disprove Arctic warming?" - an actual argument used with me, by the way.) If that fails, insults and anger follow.

Our friend Lumo is an interesting case. I notice that lately, he never even makes an attempt to present any evidence or logical argument. Instead he goes straight to obfuscation (Marxist plots), insults and denial, no matter how ridiculous:

Elimination of all CO2 wouldn't make an easily detectable difference for ice ages or any other aspect of climatology or meteorology on Earth.

My meteorologist and engineer friends are able to mount a much more plausible defense. It's only a guess, but mine is that Lumo's inner brain is smart enough not to get caught making any check-able claim (except for the patently ridiculous, as above), because he is afraid that his powerful logical brain might talk him into something that he is afraid to believe. Dumber guys don't have that worry.

The ability to believe improbable stuff is not confined to the certifiably psychotic, of course, or even the certifiably crackpot fringe. Probably everybody does it to some extent, which was Feynman's point about the necessity of the scientist to be diligent about self-criticism. It might be a crucial component of our social instincts which more or less allows us to align our beliefs with the tribe - maybe that's even why psychosis is so common. On the other hand, believing nonsense can also be hazardous to one's prospects for successful reproduction.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anti-Libertarian: re-post

The most pointed critique of social security and liberalism in general is the libertarian critique. The problem with libertarians, for a liberal, is that we have too much in common. We both believe in individual rights, tolerance of individual differences, and dislike government prescription of religion. The basic difference, it seems to me, is the different answers we give to Cain's (with thanks to the Captain - my original version had the corpse asking the question!) famous question: "Am I my brother's keeper?" That's not really my basic bitch against the libertarians though. My real complaint is the same as my complaint against most religion - its premise is a fraud. For those who can't stand to wait for the punchline, I believe that trying to implement libertarian principles leads to tyranny or social disintegration. Demonstrating that takes some historical (and pre-historical) context. For all but the last 15,000 or so of the 100,000 years the human spec
Read more

Uneasy Lies The Head

Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown ........... Shakespeare Henry IV, Part II. So it is with us and our slightly distant primate cousins , so it seems. A 9-year study of wild baboons in Kenya by Princeton University and the Institute of Primate Research may turn conventional assumptions of alphas males upside down. The study found that alpha males have high testosterone levels, which allows them to dominate other baboons, get access to more food, and attract better mates. This is expected. Surprisingly, though, the alpha males also have high levels of stress hormone glucocorticoid, which scientists measured from their feces samples. In fact, the stress of alpha baboons was on par with low-ranking baboons. The convention wisdom is that access to food and females provides life security and thus less stress for dominant males. Conversely, weak males who are constantly threatened by starvation and physical violence from stronger males are thought to be more stressed. The st
Read more

We Call it Soccer

The US played its best, and maybe only good game of World Cup, but lost thanks to brilliant goalkeeping by the Swedish keeper and the bizarre method soccer uses to settle ties when three US stars could not put the ball on frame from the 12 yard spot.  At the end it came down to a blocked shot that spun in by maybe a couple of centimeters. Well, that's football - too much like life.   Which brings me to a modest proposal.  Replace the thirty minute overtimes with as many 7-player 15 minute periods as needed to settle it.  Scoring should be much easier with fewer players.
Read more