How Science lost the Publics Trust

Author: Dr.Franklin

Posts

Total: 84
Topic's author
#31
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@ebuc
Dr Fanklin { trumpeteer } = .."Free radicals are unstable atoms that can damage cells, causing illness and aging. Free radicals are linked to aging and a host of diseases, but little is known about their role in human health, or how to prevent them from making people sick."...


And so it goes with free radicala attacking the integrity of all peoples who follow rational, logical common sense  truths associated with the scientific methodology and those resultants.

Masks help to mitigate air borne disiease, and the free radical cries out government conspiracy, to control our lives and institiute systems of government that enslave humanity. 

Is any wonder humanity is doomed with at least 74 million of these free radicals running around loose /free in USA?

End date for humanity 2232 { approx. }
so i cause aging and illness?

what
Topic's author
#32
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@3RU7AL
FREEDOM = EVIL
agree
Topic's author
#33
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit

I have never heard the term "skeptical science". You would need to give a specific example for this question to be answered.
what about climate skepticism, there are over 1300 papers addressing AGW and it gets ignored
Topic's author
#34
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
What do you think about this quote in relation to your comments about his scientific literacy?

"researchers from Tel Aviv University (TAU) have proven that the coronavirus can be killed efficiently, quickly, and cheaply using ultraviolet (UV) light-emitting diodes (UV-LEDs). They believe that the UV-LED technology will soon be available for private and commercial use.
This is the first study conducted on the disinfection efficiency of UV-LED irradiation at different wavelengths or frequencies on a virus from the family of coronaviruses. The study was led by Professor Hadas Mamane, Head of the Environmental Engineering Program at TAU's School of Mechnical Engineering, Iby and Aladar Fleischman Faculty of Engineering. The article was published in November 2020 issue of the Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology.
"The entire world is currently looking for effective solutions to disinfect the coronavirus," said Professor Mamane. "The problem is that in order to disinfect a bus, train, sports hall, or plane by chemical spraying, you need physical manpower, and in order for the spraying to be effective, you have to give the chemical time to act on the surface. Disinfection systems based on LED bulbs, however, can be installed in the ventilation system and air conditioner, for example, and sterilize the air sucked in and then emitted into the room.
"We discovered that it is quite simple to kill the coronavirus using LED bulbs that radiate ultraviolet light," she explained. "We killed the viruses using cheaper and more readily available LED bulbs, which consume little energy and do not contain mercury like regular bulbs. Our research has commercial and societal implications, given the possibility of using such LED bulbs in all areas of our lives, safely and quickly."
The researchers tested the optimal wavelength for killing the coronavirus and found that a length of 285 nanometers (nm) was almost as efficient in disinfecting the virus as a wavelength of 265 nm, requiring less than half a minute to destroy more than 99.9% of the coronaviruses. This result is significant because the cost of 285 nm LED bulbs is much lower than that of 265 nm bulbs, and the former are also more readily available.
Eventually, as the science develops, the industry will be able to make the necessary adjustments and install the bulbs in robotic systems or air conditioning, vacuum, and water systems, and thereby be able to efficiently disinfect large surfaces and spaces. Professor Mamane believes that the technology will be available for use in the near future.
It is important to note that it is very dangerous to try to use this method to disinfect surfaces inside homes. To be fully effective, a system must be designed so that a person is not directly exposed to the light.
In the future, the researchers will test their unique combination of integrated damage mechanisms and more ideas they recently developed on combined efficient direct and indirect damage to bacteria and viruses on different surfaces, air, and water.
###
The study was conducted in collaboration with Professor Yoram Gerchman of Oranim College; Dr. Michal Mandelboim, Director of the National Center for Influenza and Respiratory Viruses at Sheba Medical Center at Tel HaShomer; and Nehemya Friedman from Tel Hashomer.
ABOUT TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY
Tel Aviv University (TAU) is Israel's largest public institution of higher learning and is home to 30,000 students, including 2,100 international students from over 100 countries. The University encompasses nine faculties, 35 schools, 400 labs, and has 17 affiliated hospitals in its network.
Topic's author
#35
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Wylted
All right.  Well, if you think that Trump withholding treatment data from the public was good then I think we've established where you are coming from.  Let's refute the premise that "Science has lost the public's trust"

According to Gallup's 2021 Confidence in Institutions poll, Science is one of the most trusted institutions in America.  

64% of Americans say they trust science a Great deal/Quite a lot.  That might not seem impressive until compared to other results:

51% trust the Police
44% trust the Medical system
38% trust the Presidency
37% trust Organized Religion
36% trust the Supreme Court
33% trust Banks
32% trust Public Schools
29% trust Big Tech
28% trust Labor Unions
21% trust Newspapers
20% trust Criminal Justice
18% trust Big Business
16% trust TV news
12% trust Congress


everything that you listed are supposed to be controversial

science aint supposed to be
Topic's author
#36
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Wylted
people also lost trust in science when people like fauci came out and said that BLM protests could not spread covid19. 
good point
#37
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
people also lost trust in science when people like fauci came out and said that BLM protests could not spread covid19. 


Well, of course, that is false.

Fauci never said that BLM could not spread COVID-19.  Quite the opposite.

Jim Jordan tried to put those words in Fauci's mouth on several occaision but Fauci refused to concur.  Looks like Wylted got the message about what Trump expected him to believe and went ahead and believed it anyway even though the event never happened.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) pressed Anthony Fauci with a series of combative questions on Friday, asking him whether the government should limit protests to help slow the spread of the coronavirus.

Jordan, a close ally of President Trump and member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, drilled down on Fauci at a House hearing, echoing an argument often made by conservatives that there is a double standard when liberals and some public health experts support widespread Black Lives Matter protests, which bring together thousands of people, but push for restrictions on other gatherings like those at churches.

Fauci did not address the protests directly, but said more broadly: "Avoid crowds of any type no matter where you are ... I don't judge one crowd versus another crowd."

When Jordan pressed for a direct answer on the protests, saying, "So the protests don't increase the spread of the virus?" Fauci shot back: "I didn't say that, you're putting words in my mouth."

"I just want an answer to the question, do the protests increase the spread of the virus?" Jordan said.

"I can tell you that crowds are known, particularly when you don't have a mask, to increase the acquisition and transmission, no matter what the crowd is," Fauci replied.

Fauci has 70% trust ratings, more than science itself so it is obviously false that Fauci decreased trust in Science.  Quite the opposite.  When Biden elevated Fauci to overall authority over the pandemic response on his first day in office, the public's trust in the Government's handling increased 10% (From 40% to 50%) overnight.  Six months later the new government's handling of the coronavirus under Fauci's leadership enjoys 77% trust- more trusted than any institution or initiative that Trump ever undertook.

Wylted is so well trained to believe whatever Fox News wants him to believe that there doesn't even need to be fake news, so long certain Trump loyalists like Jim Jordan suggest it might be true, Wylted unquestioningly believes it even thought Jordan himself publicly tweeted that Fauci opposes the protests.


#38
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@3RU7AL
That would be a 12% trust situation

#39
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Dr.Franklin
-->@3RU7AL
FREEDOM = EVIL
agree
Insert image of the ghost of the real Dr.Franklin, Dr. Benjamin Franklin, co-author of the Declaration of Independence, tazing Dr.Franklin repeatedly.
#40
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Dr.Franklin
-->@Discipulus_Didicit

I have never heard the term "skeptical science". You would need to give a specific example for this question to be answered.
what about climate skepticism, there are over 1300 papers addressing AGW and it gets ignored
Climate skepticism is NOT ignored.  Most skepticism is consistently, easily disproved but that is not ignoring.  Some skeptics raise legitimate questions that don't have answers yet.   I don't know how climate skepticism persists is the face of the overwhelming evidence available to ordinary perception these days.  It's like being skeptical that it rains.
#41
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@oromagi
That would be a 12% trust situation
And there's the rub.

"the science" is not a source of news.

Not to mention that the overwhelming number of articles published in "scientific journals" are utter hogwash.
#42
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Dr.Franklin
->@Discipulus_Didicit
What do you think about this quote in relation to your comments about his scientific literacy?

"researchers from Tel Aviv University (TAU) have proven that the coronavirus can be killed efficiently, quickly, and cheaply using ultraviolet (UV) light-emitting diodes (UV-LEDs). They believe that the UV-LED technology will soon be available for private and commercial use.

Tel Aviv University (TAU) is Israel's largest public institution of higher learning and is home to 30,000 students, including 2,100 international students from over 100 countries. The University encompasses nine faculties, 35 schools, 400 labs, and has 17 affiliated hospitals in its network.
Actually, we've understood that sunlight is the best disinfectant since at least when Louis Brandeis wrote those words in 1913.  I think Disc's concern was Trump's anti-scientific suggestion that we irradiate the insides of our bodies.  Sunlight changes the cells' DNA and RNA, inhibiting reproduction which is why our skin maintains a layer of dead cells on the surface.  A lot of our internal organs don't have the same adaptations to direct UV radiation as our skin does and such an application could cause massive harm to to body.... What happens when you deliberately sunburn your stomach?  Your lungs? Your kidneys?  Why would a President recommend such reckless self-destruction?  Why would a President of the United States give so few fucks about what his scientists tell him in this matter?

Here's the actual Tel Aviv study, which makes the rather obvious notation that any real effort to reproduce the power of sunlight inside enclosed spaces (like air conditioners, for example) would either be incredibly weak if affordable and incredibly expensive if effective.


#43
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Dr.Franklin
->@Wylted
12% trust Congress


everything that you listed are supposed to be controversial

science aint supposed to be
Well, that's quite false and demonstrates a real ignorance about the nature of science.  Science is inherently, perpetually controversial.  As far as science is concerned, there is no such thing as an uncontroversial statement because science makes zero assertion of truth.  Science does not state that gravity is a fact, science observes the consistent attraction of objects according to mass, calculates the relationship between mass and attraction and then successfully predicts the pull of objects like distant planets on objects like spaceships.   Astonishingly powerful and reliable but if you ask a scientist to call it truth, a scientist will call it a theory, a law that defines a reliable relationship but not necessarily true in all circumstances or futures.

All science is always controversial.  Both science and religion try to discover the nature of the universe but one of the main differences between the two is that religion always comes to some conclusion, which must be accepted as token of membership in the congregation.  Science has no absolutes, everything is challengeable with sufficient proofs, everything is theory and no conclusion is absolute, only very consistent in outcome.
#44
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Wylted
people also lost trust in science when people like fauci came out and said that BLM protests could not spread covid19. 
Wow, I never heard of that. That would be a shitty thing for someone to say.

Source?
#45
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@3RU7AL
Not to mention that the overwhelming number of articles published in "scientific journals" are utter hogwash.

Well, the definition of "scientific journals" has changed significantly in the age of the internet as has the definition of "publication" "peer review" but there is relatively unchanged core of scientific standard within all that noise, which, when sought out and trusted yields reliable although hardly perfect results.
#46
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
What happens when you deliberately sunburn you stomach?  You lungs? Your kidneys?  Why would a President recommend such reckless self-destruction?  Why would a President of the United States give so few fucks about what his scientist tell him in this matter.
Beat me to it.

Melanin is a thing that exists for a reason, UV is dangerous to living cells. Blasting UV onto cells that are supposed to go their entire cellular life cycle in the darkness of a human body is... not an idea I would normally expect from someone that graduated middle school.

He then went on to say...

And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning, because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me.
Boys and girls... please don't drink cleaning chemicals.
#47
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
I legit have seen media say that shit
#48
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
people also lost trust in science when people like fauci came out and said that BLM protests could not spread covid19. 

Fauci says "crowding together" does increase risk of spread.

Fauci refuses to say "protests should be limited".

#49
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,896
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
Tell us, fearless leader, how would you, in your unparalleled wisdom, how would you fix this mess?
1} global issues { "mess" }  require global involvement,  ---ex United Nations was created for a set of reasons----,

......interspersed with education of a set of spiritually significant feelings that espouse a moral imperative to  find truth, share the truth and trust, compassion, caring for all of humanity going forward with a all-for-one and one-for-all mentality knowing full well will some perish along the way   --- or standards of living may have to be lessened----   because of the complexity involved uniting 8 billion+ _ 200+ nations } people on Earth..... ****maybe add in the  three libertarian moral laws**** if agreed upon by enough of humanity......

2} correctly identifying the "mess", {  globally detrimental issues to ecological systems that sustain us },

......interspersed with education of a set of spiritually significant feelings that espouse a moral imperative to  find truth, share the truth and trust, compassion, caring for all of humanity going forward with a all-for-one and one-for-all mentality knowing full well some will perish along the way because of the complexity involved uniting 8 billion+  { 200+ nations } people on Earth..... maybe add in the  three libertarian moral laws if agreed upon by enough of humanity......


3} use super-computer with the appropriately relevant data of so we may see various optional trajectories humanity appears to be going on  ------ the recent hot spells was partially caused by jet stream that slow its progression west to east, and that was not predicted in some global warming climate models---  ergo humanity should be increasing by 100.000s of people doing this kind of various data entry an computer based scenario outputs etc


......interspersed with education of a set of spiritually significant feelings that espouse a moral imperative to  find truth, share the truth and trust, compassion, caring for all of humanity going forward with a all-for-one and one-for-all mentality knowing full well some will perish along the way because of the complexity involved uniting 8 billion+ { 200+ nations } people on Earth..... maybe add in the  three libertarian moral laws if agreed upon by enough of humanity......

4} review, present and educate humanity  that, if they dont already understand it, humanity is not on good trajectory and the computer model scenarios agree with what most scientists already intuit is happening and or coming.

.......interspersed with education of a set of spiritually significant feelings that espouse a moral imperative to  find truth, share the truth and trust, compassion, caring for all of humanity going forward with a all-for-one and one-for-all mentality knowing full well some will perish along the way because of the complexity involved uniting 8 billion+ { 200+ nations } people on Earth..... maybe add in the  three libertarian moral laws if agreed upon by enough of humanity......


5} if there are computer scenarios that point to ethics, truth trust etc over economic path only, humanity needs to be educated as to these options scenarios, and others, so here with #5 paragraph,  I'm beginning to repeat myself from #4.
 
Ways in following LINK, that, we know humanity can become extinct immediatly, very short time, or moderate longer time, were some may survive in a really "mess" of much worse ecologically strained world.


If some percentage of world believes all is fine, then that global poll needs to be taken before and after each set of new global scenarios ---based on super-computers output---, on every 6 months or however we  { United Nations that is trusted to have moral and intellectual integrity } can decide.

...............interspersed with education of a set of spiritually significant feelings that espouse a moral imperative to  find truth, share the truth and trust, compassion, caring for all of humanity going forward with a all-for-one and one-for-all mentality knowing full well some will perish along the way because of the complexity involved uniting 8 billion+ { 200+ nations } people on Earth..... maybe add in the  three libertarian moral laws if agreed upon by enough of humanity......
#50
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@3RU7AL

@Discipulus_Didicit
people also lost trust in science when people like fauci came out and said that BLM protests could not spread covid19. 

Fauci says "crowding together" does increase risk of spread.

Fauci refuses to say "protests should be limited".
That is a lie.  Fauci said all mass gatherings should be avoided, including political protests.  Fauci refused to do Congress's job for them, which was to decide on reasonable limits. 

Fauci said:

" I’m not going to opine on limiting anything ... I’m telling you what is the danger, and you can make your own conclusion about that. You should stay away from crowds, no matter where the crowds are.”  I can tell you that crowds are known, particularly when you don't have a mask, to increase the acquisition and transmission, no matter what the crowd is
In exactly the same way Fauci  did not tell Trump to cancel his super-spreader rallies but instead just explained that such behaviour substantially increased risks.

"We know that is asking for trouble when you do that. We’ve seen that when you have situations of congregate settings where there are a lot of people without masks, the data speak for themselves.   And now is even more so a worse time to do that,”
Jim Jordan tweeted after this exchange:

" Even Dr. Fauci says protesting is dangerous"  
#51
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
I legit have seen media say that shit
Can't tell what you are referencing here

#52
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
you legit Don't watch left wing news sources and are confused that any said that the riots were not a covid19 risk like visiting your friends are?

Topic's author
#53
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@oromagi
Well, that's quite false and demonstrates a real ignorance about the nature of science.  Science is inherently, perpetually controversial.  As far as science is concerned, there is no such thing as an uncontroversial statement because science makes zero assertion of truth.  Science does not state that gravity is a fact, science observes the consistent attraction of objects according to mass, calculates the relationship between mass and attraction and then successfully predicts the pull of objects like distant planets on objects like spaceships.   Astonishingly powerful and reliable but if you ask a scientist to call it truth, a scientist will call it a theory, a law that defines a reliable relationship but not necessarily true in all circumstances or futures.

All science is always controversial.  Both science and religion try to discover the nature of the universe but one of the main differences between the two is that religion always comes to some conclusion, which must be accepted as token of membership in the congregation.  Science has no absolutes, everything is challengeable with sufficient proofs, everything is theory and no conclusion is absolute, only very consistent in outcome.
what i meant by controversy is that is is not supposed to divide the public, yes science theories come and go but it is proffessional and its hard to compare science to something like congress
Topic's author
#54
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Wylted

related article
Topic's author
#55
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@oromagi
@Discipulus_Didicit
no, he wasnt encouraging a single soul about putting uv on your body

he said "So, supposedly we hit the body with a tremendous, whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light, and I think you said that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it. "

literally saying that he is looking for a scientific treatment of covid, and while he did mention uv lights, he also mentions A LIGHT, it was testing for science

the tel aviv study talked about uv lights because they were testing it

trump, the most pro-science president ever then 
#56
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
-->
@Dr.Franklin
he said "So, supposedly we hit the body with a tremendous, whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light, and I think you said that hasn’t been checked, but you’re going to test it. "
We in the non-suicidal community refer to this as a bad idea.

Boys and girls... please don't drink cleaning chemicals.
#57
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
Added07.31.21 02:17PM
-->@oromagi
you legit Don't watch left wing news sources and are confused that any said that the riots were not a covid19 risk like visiting your friends are?

I can't tell what you're trying to say here.  Can you restate?

#58
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,568
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Yes, the Tel Aviv University sudy says:
It is important to note that it is very dangerous to try to use this method to disinfect surfaces inside homes. To be fully effective, a system must be designed so that a person is not directly exposed to the light.
#59
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
Science is science Doc.

And rhetoric is rhetoric.

There's no getting away from the trust that the public have invested in science.


#60
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Dr.Franklin

07.31.21 02:29PM
-->@oromagi

what i meant by controversy is that is is not supposed to divide the public, yes science theories come and go but it is proffessional and its hard to compare science to something like congress
Well, science has to stay on the side of the facts whether the public divides over those facts or not.  When Copernicus showed that the Earth was not the center of the universe, the people were divided but science had no obligation to modify the truth to preserve unity.  When science said that black people were just as human as whites, people divided violently and died by the hundreds of thousands on both sides of the issue but science had not obligation except to the observable facts and repeatable results.   People divide over the efficacy of vaccines but science is not divided on that question and has no obligation to treat the skeptics as rational because they are not rational, by and large.

There is no supposed to be about Science- science just follows that facts.