You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–] GapingAnus 1 points 18 points (+19|-1) ago 

Handled the wrong way. You can't just state the truth with these people because they will just reject it.

You need to cite sources. Even for trivial dumb shit that everyone knows. Your average redditor is a product of the public school system and hasn't been taught controversial things. But they do treat scientific publications as holy writ so any citable sources (with DOI) are necessary when trying to convince them that water is wet.

[–] PuritySpiral 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

You need to cite sources.

Doesn't do any good when at worst they ignore your sources and at best they call your sources racist propaganda.

[–] MaunaLoona 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

to quote a post on reddit:

Do you have a source on that?


A source. I need a source.

Sorry, I mean I need a source that explicitly states your argument. This is just tangential to the discussion.

No, you can't make inferences and observations from the sources you've gathered. Any additional comments from you MUST be a subset of the information from the sources you've gathered.

You can't make normative statements from empirical evidence.

Do you have a degree in that field?

A college degree? In that field?

Then your arguments are invalid.

No, it doesn't matter how close those data points are correlated. Correlation does not equal causation.

Correlation does not equal causation.


You still haven't provided me a valid source yet.

Nope, still haven't.

[–] ADaniels 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Lmao, I tried to tell my sister that black men and illegal immigrants together account for 70 percent of the murders in the country, cited the FBI’s crime stats, and then She told me that I was racist and that it’s because they are oppressed by whitey.

[–] InSideThePerson 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Illegal Immigrants.

Amazes me how rapid that propaganda spread to all sides. Around here we call em Illegal Aliens.

[–] ethtirlomalral 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

But even then you’re still kinda fucked because popular journals are not without their own political slant. It also MUST be peer reviewed, according to them, as if peer review were infallible. What would David Irving’s peers have to say about him?

[–] GapingAnus 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

There's editorial bias, sure. But the fringe has become so anti-science that just using uncontroversial sources is more than adequate.

Also, I try to be open to the possibility of being wrong myself so if a study comes to a different conclusion than I hold, I'll defer to the boffins in lab coats until proven otherwise.