Thread: Partisanship versus reason

Saw this the other day. Not certain on its validity. Take it for what it's worth.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Just like there isn't FACT that it is legit yet we have a topic about a study that says if you refuse to believe it is indeed FACT then you have mental problems. Seems to me the only thing this "study" proves is that both sides are just as full of shit. But maybe I read it wrong.

Nowhere in the study does it say people have mental problems. It states that people become irrational/illogical when presented with information that is contrary to what they believe.

Originally Posted by -Lazarus-

Holy shit, this study was ridiculous.

For example:



Notice this one. They didn't take into account WHY these people felt this way (some people see replacing a full time job with benefits with a part time job with no benefits and welfare as not the same thing), or if the people answering trusted the source for the information provided. It appears that if anyone argued a point the researcher simply inferred people must not be using reason since the numbers are "right there".

But even more dangerous is this thought:



The only problem there is that there is a shit ton of evidence that Global Warming is bullshit and it's also an absolute fact that global warming scientists lied to cover it up.

Wow man, psychological disorder? What a perfect example of liberal thinking. Get ready for the reeducation camps.

The article i posted and the scientific paper are separate entities. (primary vs. secondary sources) The article is annoying and biased. It also doesn't go into the actual methods. So before you jump the gun you may want to take a look at them.

Motivated Numeracy and Enlightened Self-Government by Dan M. Kahan, Ellen Peters, Erica Cantrell Dawson, Paul Slovic :: SSRN
Click download and go to page 9 if interested.

What they did was supply a 2x2 chart and a multiple choice answer for you to interpret what the chart said. If the data was different from what your politically party believed, there was a large increase in the number of incorrect answers.

Originally Posted by CivilWars

The problem I have based on what I read is that the person doing the study only feels you are irrational/illogical if you don't believe humans are causing global warming. Are people also considered irrational/illogical when they continue to believe it even when contradictory evidence is submitted? It sounds to me like in his opinion human create climate change is a fact, and I think many think that is debateable at best, but if you choose not to believe it as fact only then are you irrational/illogical.

I should have posted the original article (ie the actual study), which i did in the post above what i just posted. I don't deny that the huffington post piece is judgemental and annoying. The actual study imo shows people being irrational.

Mr Christy agrees that there has been some warming over time, but says man-made greenhouse gasses are not as big of a driver of climate change as many think -- and that many scientists are in denial about their mistakes.

This would agree with the article i posted. haha

Originally Posted by SpecOpsScott

Sort of like what this guy observed in the 50's.
Leon Festinger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I just find it funny that i have seen posts like yours in a few different places lately, and the very people posting this material tend to be the most rabid when their views are challenged. Not in all cases, but enough to raise an eyebrow.

I haven't posted in a while, so don't lump me with those other people