Reddit mentions of Wrong: Why experts* keep failing us--and how to know when not to trust them *Scientists, finance wizards, doctors, relationship gurus, celebrity CEOs, ... consultants, health officials and more

>Trust the environmental scientists with climate information, even though they tend to have more liberal values on the situation. Trust the economists with the economy and the financial aspects of things, even though they tend to lean more economically conservative.

Hell no. Never trust experts. They are mostly shills these days. Like when 9 in 10 doctors recommended Marlboro.https://www.amazon.com/Wrong-us-Scientists-relationship-consultants/dp/0316023787

What you're saying is definitely part of the problem there are a ton more.

We definitely have a ton of issues with science itself and I say that as a scientist. Not enough replicating of test results is one aspect that jumps to mind. Another is the demand for results. Companies and universities don't want to fund a test that shows the previous test results were held up, they want the break through's.

Lastly, all this being said science isn't about trust, its actually about the opposite IMO. You don't trust the result? Try to replicate the test, see if you get the same result. Be skeptical! Think critically. When I look at a peer reviewed paper I don't think: "Okay this person has to be right because it's published." I am looking at their method to see if the test makes sense and do the results come to a conclusion that relates or is possible with the methodology. Do their sources make sense? Papers tend to have dozens of references so it's not like your going to sift through each one but if you see certain situations you may do some digging. "I am referring to a sentence that looks like this or maybe something similar^1, you can do some interesting working of citing^2 to make it look like papers agreed with what your presenting^3."

I could go one for days about this but This book does a better job than I do about this topic and I highly suggest people read it. It's short and an entertaining read.

Found a link for anyone who doesn't want to google it.

Also, this article was also written by Freedman and is also a good read about these issue.

If you're interested in the cycle of pronouncements telling you something is bad for you, then retracting, and then claiming again, you might be interested in the book Wrong: Why experts keep failing us and how to know not to trust them.

Now this is truly something interesting.

>the unscientific stuff that constitutes the IPCC–led propaganda bandied about as “scientific consensus”), scores 7 out of 7 on the Freedman scale and therefore should lie at the bottom of anybody’s trust level: ...


I'd never heard of this "wrongology" or the "Freedman scale". I see there's this book at Amazon. I might have to check this out.