Why Do We Waste Money On Science...

Avatar Image
Atheist | 21:18 Thu 03rd Jun 2021 | Science
23 Answers
...when AB has the finest brains in the world who have all the simple answers to such issues as climate change at their fingertips?


1 to 20 of 23rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Atheist. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
it's a mystery isn't it!
Question Author
And they cost us nothing. We don't have to pay for education or training. They just know. Even judges, car mechanics... Thye all know.
There is more than purely the science to consider when the effects of any action based only on this science can have other far reaching consequences that need to be considered.
I think the answer at 20:47 to this question:

demonstrates why many people take much of what they're told with a pinch of salt. Trouble is, it's becoming a very expensive pinch of salt.
Don't know, Atheist. Why do we?
Question Author
dave, if you make important decisions based on unqualified loud-mouths or, more politely, on non-proven premises, then those decisions are necessarily flawed, since they do not a have a basis in fact.
I really don't want Johnson making decisions based on the views of know-nothings such as one finds here.
Question Author
jourdain, I don't think we do waste money on science; it's more expensive than bunging NJ fifty quid a week for his opinion, but in my view well worth the money.
So, Atheist, your solution to issues such as climate change is "bung more money at it" and see if it goes away? Doesn't sound overly rational, but might keep the Climate kids happy for a bit.
The answer to your question is simple, Atheist.

Those of us who really do know absolutely everything about everything just can't be bothered to pass on our vastly superior knowledge to people who simply wouldn't understand it anyway.

That's not true, I pop in here sometimes!
//I really don't want Johnson making decisions based on the views of know-nothings such as one finds here.//

One thing is for sure - the decision to mandate face coverings was certainly made as a result of pressure from the Twitterati. At the beginning of the pandemic the WHO was quite clear that the widespread wearing of non-medical grade facemasks by the wider population was of little benefit in preventing virus spread. If you look at this paper (NERVTAG paper: face mask use in the community) from 13/4/20:

Under "options" on p2 you will find this:

Policy Option:
Universal face masks in the community.

Given possibility of significant presymptomatic transmission, may
provide a very small incremental increase in protection.

Evidence of lack of effectiveness. May result in decreased compliance with social distancing, hand hygiene etc. Unlikely to have a significant impact whilst social distancing in force.
Supply issues.

Level of support:
Not recommended.

Similar non-recommendations were made by the WHO (you can look them up). The WHO went further and suggested that the risk of self-contamination by people untrained and undisciplined in the use of PPE (something I have touched on many times) far outweighed any small benefits that may be evident.

But lo and behold, less than two months later, following a widespread campaign on social media accusing no mask wearers of being "granny killers" the advice was reversed and face coverings - with all their drawbacks still evident but not emphasised - were mandated.

So be careful what you wish for when you ask politicians to steer clear of unqualified loud-mouths.
i dont understand what you mean NJ - that proves EXACTLY athiest's point - he doesn't want the government making decisions based on the people who don't know!
I think Atheist has a valid point.

The number of AB armchair experts on Covid is astonishing; why the Government aren’t consulting these oracles is a disgrace.
As is invariably the case, NJ has misrepresented the history of mask-related advice. Early on, the advice was indeed confused, although that was in no small part due to the potential for supply issues at a time when, clearly, PPE was in short supply and desperately needed by medical staff. More to the point, early on we had very little idea what worked, if anything, when it came to Covid, and mask-wearing is no exception to that. Ot wasn't until later, when studies came out showing a benefit, that the advice changed. See, for example, ; .

In other words, as per usual, the advice changed in response to evidence. Social pressure may have played a part, but it was secondary to evidence.
//Early on, the advice was indeed confused,...//

No it wasn't. It was perfectly clear. All sources that I read of unequivocally subscribed to the view I illustrated. Those views were formed long before the Covid pandemic hit the streets, and were based on evidence from earlier pandemics. They changed in response to Social Media opinion, not to any new found evidence.
Regardless of the ‘evidence’ of the efficacy of wearing a muzzle (and the efficacy is, at best, iffy) surely it is predicated on people using masks correctly, isn’t it?

I went to B&Q today and Sainsbury’s, and most people I saw, customers and staff, and I include me in this, had their nose exposed. I only noticed this because, stupidly, I’m now looking.

// Even judges, car mechanics. telephone sanitisers... They all know.

and they know far more than you think
By God they do!

Dossers and the unbusy retireds - unstoppable in the way they serve the world
//i dont understand what you mean NJ - that proves EXACTLY athiest's point - he doesn't want the government making decisions based on the people who don't know!//

Sorry, I didn't make my point very clearly. In my view the change to compulsory mask wearing was made in response to social media pressure. Most people it seems are perfectly happy with being ordered to muzzle up including, I would imagine, our friend Atheist. But the decision was made in response to "loud mouths".
judge is correct, beyond the specialised medical ones, masks serve only a placebo style purpose they certainly have no effect on the virus' ability to exit the mouth and nose. They have a powerful effect on the hard of thinking and knowledge thus governments have bought into the charade.
That make all ABers taxi drivers

Am I Right ?
I'm Not Wrong !

1 to 20 of 23rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Why Do We Waste Money On Science...

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.