Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Journal by khallow
I ran across a recent study ("Knowledge overconfidence is associated with anti-consensus views on controversial scientific issues", published July 2022) that had some interesting results. The study asked subjects to rate their opposition to some scientific claim that is generally held to be true (a "consensus"). They then asked the subjects to evaluate their own knowledge in the area and finally tested the subjects on their actual knowledge of the subject. This resulted in a three value data set of "opposition", "subjective knowledge", and "objective knowledge". The opposition questions are listed in the above study.

For example, one on GM foods:

"Consuming foods with ingredients derived from GM crops is no riskier than consuming foods modified by conventional plant improvement techniques."

The primary conclusion is that for a number of claims that are generally held to be true by consensus, opposition to those results show interesting correlations: opposition correlates negatively with objective knowledge (what the final test indicated that the subject knew about the field), and positively with subjective knowledge (what the subject thought they knew about the field). Those who were most opposed tended to exhibit a large gap between what they knew and what they thought they knew.

Here's the list of subjects and then I'll get to the punch line:

  • GM foods
  • Vaccination
  • Homeopathic medicine
  • Nuclear power
  • Climate change
  • Big bang
  • Evolution

Which one wasn't like the others?

Climate change!

The question was in the same vein as the rest:

Most of the warming of Earth’s average global temperature over the second half of the 20th century has been caused by human activities.

Unlike every other field listed in this research, there was a slight positive correlation between opposition to the claim and objective knowledge of the subject (see figure 2).

What other consensus viewpoints are out there where agreement with the consensus correlations with greater ignorance of the subject? Economics maybe?

 

Reply to: Re:Trees vs khallow

    (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday August 22 2022, @09:58PM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 22 2022, @09:58PM (#1268035)
    I note that none of those events qualify because your evidence isn't "compelling" and in at least one case doesn't actually exist (the second one that starts "According to CMIP5 simulations" indicates that they don't actually have any evidence at all to support their assertion). Given the puffery you spout about the current bout of drought in Europe, I certainly would need an unusual amount of evidence from you before I take those examples as due solely to global warming.

    It is not altogether obvious that there is historical precedent for the drought and heat wave in Europe.

    Indeed. I imagine if you had actually looked at history rather than bloviate about history, you would have indeed found written evidence for many nasty UK isles droughts over the historical period.

    If you believe there is historical evidence, you should be able to provide evidence for it. That evidence may not be direct measurements of the temperature, precipitation, or soil moisture, but historical writings are still useful.

    How about "driest July since 1935" [express.co.uk]? The story mentions five droughts in recent times (including the two I mentioned) as well as a more severe (as in more severe than any of the droughts mentioned so far including the present one) drought that lasted from 1765 to 1768.

    There's a reason that extreme weather is the cutting edge pseudoscience of climatology.

Post Comment

Edit Comment You are not logged in. You can log in now using the convenient form below, or Create an Account, or post as Anonymous Coward.

Public Terminal

Anonymous Coward [ Create an Account ]

Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs!


Logged-in users aren't forced to preview their comments. Create an Account!

Allowed HTML
<b|i|p|br|a|ol|ul|li|dl|dt|dd|em|strong|tt|blockquote|div|ecode|quote|sup|sub|abbr|sarc|sarcasm|user|spoiler|del>

URLs
<URL:http://example.com/> will auto-link a URL

Important Stuff

  • Please try to keep posts on topic.
  • Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads.
  • Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said.
  • Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
  • Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)
  • If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

If you are having a problem with accounts or comment posting, please yell for help.