An inability to determine opinion from fact is at the root of this whole thread.
You got that right and it has gotten worse over the years. Way worse.
AZ has not dumbed down....
Yes it has. Substantially.
People are listening to others besides PJ and it's killing him.
As it should. PJ is one of the few that deals only with facts and has the intellect to discern between that and opinion all of the time.
Not enough to where he will try any of the techniques and maybe learn something.
Fact is many people simply lack the intellect to understand in some cases how someone else could know something that they don't know. Here is a simple example for you that most everyone will understand. If you tell me that if I jump off the top of the Empire state building and wiggle my arms a certain way that I will be able to safely fly around the skies I will know that you are wrong. I don't have to try it to know. There is zero doubt whatsoever. Now that is an easy one that everyone would get, but sometimes it takes a lot more intellect to see it. Sometimes something can be even more impossible, just as dumb, with absolutely 0% chance of being true, but all but the most intelligent can't see it for what it is--they simply lack the intellect. Another example. If you want to argue that the Pythagorean theorem is wrong I can prove that it is right, but you lack the intellect to understand the proof. Not a knock, just the way it is.
The bottom line is that when a scientist who could spot you 20 IQ points in a contest and still beat you by a bunch of points tells you something is without doubt a certain way, and there are no other equally credible scientists and intellectuals arguing otherwise, you should just shut up and accept what they are telling you. Part of the problem though, and this is a real catch 22, is that people don't know how dumb they really are. Think of all the really dumb people you have known in life. How many of them realized how dumb they were? Not many. You don't know what you don't know, until you are so brilliant that you always know. A good rule of thumb might be that if you don't think you could be a be a physicist if you wanted to, and without much effort or struggle, then you probably have no business arguing science things on an internet forum (and if you don't know if you could be a physicist because you have never taken physics then just chalk yourself up as one who couldn't be one because if you had the intellect you would have at least taken it in high school).
The science is not settled on anywhere near all of the topics.
The science is settled on most things discussed on this forum, many just don't have the intellect to see it. And for those things where it isn't 100% certain you will ALWAYS see Bob Jewett or Dr Dave or Mike Page or Pat Johnson or the others with the exceptional intellect and understanding of science say something along the lines of "well IMO it works like this" or "well all of the evidence supports this" or "I theorize that this is what is happening". In other words if there is any uncertainly, they don't state it as fact. If they state it as fact, then take it to the bank, it's fact.
On the flip side, even if they are clear that their belief has not been proven without doubt, smart money would still bet their side as they only hold a belief that is supported by all the facts and evidence that is available.
An engineer or a scientist knows that all it takes is just one different experiment or additional variable to change what we think so they keep their minds open and they generally don't belittle other theories. Today's facts were yesterday only theories so what does that say for tomorrow??
See the above. When there is any doubt in something, any possibility whatsoever something could turn out differently than they are proclaiming, it will never be stated as fact.
I'm not trying to knock people or put people down with the post but I have to call a spade a spade. The crux of the matter and most of the problems on this forum are that you have idiots trying to argue with brilliant people. Again, some of it can be excused because it is hard to see how dumb oneself is, and because you don't know what you don't know, but on the other hand some of the time you clearly know that the person you are arguing with is about twenty times smarter than you are. Those are the cases where you should just shut up and learn.
