<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="todaycom/2.3.1" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Experts&#8211;or Not</title>
	<link>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/29/experts-or-not/</link>
	<description>Melding fiction and science in life and on paper</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 16:37:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://www.today.com/version-2.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: bookish</title>
		<link>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/29/experts-or-not/#comment-2899</link>
		<dc:creator>bookish</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 23:30:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/29/experts-or-not/#comment-2899</guid>
		<description>Now I may need to find this book. I've noticed the same thing myself.

A few months ago, before the economic collapse, I had started asking people why they were still swallowing the economic claptrap they'd been fed for 3 or more decades, as though we didn't finally have enough data to judge whether all that laissez-faire theory actually &lt;i&gt;did&lt;/i&gt; produce a far better living standard and prosperity for everyone. As far as I could tell, the evidence suggested that it didn't, and that in fact people weren't as well off now as they'd been before this stuff started getting put into action.

So I'd say, "Waitwaitwait, you're accepting what these theorists say, to justify their latest move to privatize stuff or whatever, as though it's gospel truth, just because they've repeated it so often and so loudly. But we've got 3 decades of evidence now! Aren't you even going to check to &lt;i&gt;see&lt;/i&gt; if what they've claimed 1000 times before has come to pass, before you just accept their word that it will come to pass this time??"

And now I'm saying to people, "Waitwaitwait, you're listening to the &lt;i&gt;very same people&lt;/i&gt; who caused this economic collapse in the first place, and expecting them to tell you how to make it better?? What are you, insane?"

But when you've had "experts" proclaiming their theories and expertise loudly and incessantly for several decades, it's very hard not to just accept that They Must Know What They're Talking About, Just Ask Them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Now I may need to find this book. I&#8217;ve noticed the same thing myself.</p>
<p>A few months ago, before the economic collapse, I had started asking people why they were still swallowing the economic claptrap they&#8217;d been fed for 3 or more decades, as though we didn&#8217;t finally have enough data to judge whether all that laissez-faire theory actually <i>did</i> produce a far better living standard and prosperity for everyone. As far as I could tell, the evidence suggested that it didn&#8217;t, and that in fact people weren&#8217;t as well off now as they&#8217;d been before this stuff started getting put into action.</p>
<p>So I&#8217;d say, &#8220;Waitwaitwait, you&#8217;re accepting what these theorists say, to justify their latest move to privatize stuff or whatever, as though it&#8217;s gospel truth, just because they&#8217;ve repeated it so often and so loudly. But we&#8217;ve got 3 decades of evidence now! Aren&#8217;t you even going to check to <i>see</i> if what they&#8217;ve claimed 1000 times before has come to pass, before you just accept their word that it will come to pass this time??&#8221;</p>
<p>And now I&#8217;m saying to people, &#8220;Waitwaitwait, you&#8217;re listening to the <i>very same people</i> who caused this economic collapse in the first place, and expecting them to tell you how to make it better?? What are you, insane?&#8221;</p>
<p>But when you&#8217;ve had &#8220;experts&#8221; proclaiming their theories and expertise loudly and incessantly for several decades, it&#8217;s very hard not to just accept that They Must Know What They&#8217;re Talking About, Just Ask Them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: attygnorris</title>
		<link>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/29/experts-or-not/#comment-2896</link>
		<dc:creator>attygnorris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 22:34:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/29/experts-or-not/#comment-2896</guid>
		<description>"no real scientist refuses questions or belittles people who disagree."

I'm with you there!  And, yes.  It does apply to other areas than just science.  "Religion" comes to mind...

Davida</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;no real scientist refuses questions or belittles people who disagree.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m with you there!  And, yes.  It does apply to other areas than just science.  &#8220;Religion&#8221; comes to mind&#8230;</p>
<p>Davida</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stephanieebarr</title>
		<link>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/29/experts-or-not/#comment-2893</link>
		<dc:creator>stephanieebarr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 12:54:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/29/experts-or-not/#comment-2893</guid>
		<description>Clearly, I'm not the only one who's had this experience.  Thanks for the feedback.

I've been in many a meeting where nonsense was clearly put on screen (often complete with cool photographs and animations, slick twists and unsubstantiated claims, often in complete contradiction to the data they themselves are presenting) - yet I'll be the only one to challenge it because they are "experts."  It's nice to know I'm not alone out there.

And, Relax Max, that's a heck of a compliment.  Thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Clearly, I&#8217;m not the only one who&#8217;s had this experience.  Thanks for the feedback.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve been in many a meeting where nonsense was clearly put on screen (often complete with cool photographs and animations, slick twists and unsubstantiated claims, often in complete contradiction to the data they themselves are presenting) - yet I&#8217;ll be the only one to challenge it because they are &#8220;experts.&#8221;  It&#8217;s nice to know I&#8217;m not alone out there.</p>
<p>And, Relax Max, that&#8217;s a heck of a compliment.  Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: shakespeare</title>
		<link>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/29/experts-or-not/#comment-2891</link>
		<dc:creator>shakespeare</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 03:41:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/29/experts-or-not/#comment-2891</guid>
		<description>Too true... too true. In academia it's the disease of choice, I think. My favorite bogus "expert" is Harold Bloom, who's published countless books on literature--especially Renaissance lit. And I hate him. I've had so many well-meaning instructors and students go horribly wrong because of his ridiculous ideas... and his pomposity is unmatched. 

Just a rant from my own sector.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Too true&#8230; too true. In academia it&#8217;s the disease of choice, I think. My favorite bogus &#8220;expert&#8221; is Harold Bloom, who&#8217;s published countless books on literature&#8211;especially Renaissance lit. And I hate him. I&#8217;ve had so many well-meaning instructors and students go horribly wrong because of his ridiculous ideas&#8230; and his pomposity is unmatched. </p>
<p>Just a rant from my own sector.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roy Hilbinger</title>
		<link>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/29/experts-or-not/#comment-2890</link>
		<dc:creator>Roy Hilbinger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2009 02:46:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://rocketscientist.today.com/2009/03/29/experts-or-not/#comment-2890</guid>
		<description>Yeah, I watched&lt;a href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=220252&#38;title=cnbc-financial-advice" rel="nofollow"&gt; Jon Stewart smack down&lt;/a&gt; Rick Santelli and CNBC for their reportage on the health of the markets. Especially sickening was to watch all the "experts" make their optimistic forecasts while the market numbers dropped, and dropped, and dropped while the amounts of bailout money rose. And of course to watch CNBC's sycophantic "reporters" sucking up to the CEOs and not once challenge their (the CEOs') assurances that there was nothing wrong, everything was just rolling right along smoothly.

I'll have to get Tetlock's book. I never heard of the Dr. Fox effect, but it sounds right on the mark. In fact it sounds almost like Jon Stewart's segment. Great minds surely do think alike!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, I watched<a href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=220252&amp;title=cnbc-financial-advice" rel="nofollow"> Jon Stewart smack down</a> Rick Santelli and CNBC for their reportage on the health of the markets. Especially sickening was to watch all the &#8220;experts&#8221; make their optimistic forecasts while the market numbers dropped, and dropped, and dropped while the amounts of bailout money rose. And of course to watch CNBC&#8217;s sycophantic &#8220;reporters&#8221; sucking up to the CEOs and not once challenge their (the CEOs&#8217;) assurances that there was nothing wrong, everything was just rolling right along smoothly.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll have to get Tetlock&#8217;s book. I never heard of the Dr. Fox effect, but it sounds right on the mark. In fact it sounds almost like Jon Stewart&#8217;s segment. Great minds surely do think alike!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>


