Valid reason then, not now

Denyse takes down Sabine, but not quite far enough.

Hossenfelder:

A lot of media coverage on science policy remembers that science is fallible only when it’s convenient for them. When they’ve proclaimed something as fact that later turns out to be wrong, then they’ll blame science. Because science is fallible. Facemasks? Yeah, well, we lacked the data. Alright.

NO, WE DID NOT LACK THE FUCKING DATA. REAL PUBLIC HEALTH HAD ESTABLISHED OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER FOR ONE HUNDRED FUCKING YEARS THAT MUZZLES ARE USELESS.

Hossenfelder:

But that’d be more convincing if science news acknowledged that their information might be wrong in the first place. The population bomb? Peak oil? The new ice age? Yeah, maybe if they’d made it clearer at the time that those stories might not pan out the way they said then we wouldn’t today have to cope with climate change deniers who think the media can’t tell fact from fiction.

She bashes previous writers for taking the consensus of the time as final fact, then IMMEDIATELY takes the consensus of the time as final fact. All in one paragraph. I doubt she’s trying for parody or irony.

There’s an added factor in both “climate” and muzzles. Previous theories and experiments were NOT politicized, so they stood a better chance of being correct enough. The modern consensus on muzzles and “climate” is TOTALLY politicized. All tyranny, zero science. So it’s guaranteed to be wrong and MURDEROUS.

= = = = =

A 1953 radio program (the same one that I clipped the mocking laughter from) featured an interview with Chicago Times science writer Ruth Moore, who was pushing her book ‘Man, Time and Fossils.’ Announcer Nancy Terry, primarily a gossip columnist, asked good questions, and Moore was a good explainer. She used the story of Piltdown Man  to show how knowledge develops gradually. The first modeler made a bad extrapolation from the small fragment of skull, and created a very small ape-like brain. The next modeler paid more attention to how skulls are built, and created a skull of modern dimensions. Then Carbon-14 dating came along and verified that the fragment was closer to modern. Consensus placed Piltdown Man as around 50k years old.

BUT: At the time of the interview, the researchers who finally figured out that the whole thing was a clever fraud hadn’t yet published their results. So her conclusion was correct enough at the moment but would very soon be invalidated.

This is NOT the same as Hossenfelder’s failure, because the correct information was simply not available in 1953. “We lacked the data” was a valid reason.

= = = = =

Irrelevant footnote: I got curious whether the Chicago Sun-Times still has a female science editor. The Sun-Times appears to be more or less “publishing”, but it’s owned by a Diversity Coop, and it’s all about Diversity. No science editor at all, no tech editor at all. In other words, it had more REAL diversity in 1953.