this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2024
56 points (91.2% liked)

InsanePeopleFacebook

2698 readers
1 users here now

Screenshots of people being insane on Facebook. Please censor names/pics of end users in screenshots. Please follow the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

TL;DR: People be dumb.

all 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] tyler@programming.dev 15 points 6 months ago (1 children)

We really need to stop calling it a theory, because the lowest common denominator has no clue what it actually means.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 37 points 6 months ago (4 children)

I understand why you're saying that, but I would say that scientific terms shouldn't be changed just to appeal to the lowest common denominator. That isn't science, that's PR.

Now we do have a lack of good science communicators. A lot of people don't like Neil DeGrasse-Tyson, although there seems to be less hate for Bill Nye. We sure could use a guy like Carl Sagan these days though. I think what Sagan really understood and was able to do in a way that people who came after him just couldn't replicate was getting people to understand science through the wonder of it all. To show them that the real universe is a far more interesting place than anything they might read in any book of fiction from thousands of years ago.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

“It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known.”

We do have a number of great communicators out there, many are Youtube channel creators. They just aren't as likely to get to the majority of regular people since someone would need to start looking for answers to trigger the algorithm.

Some of the best Sagan public moments were on the Tonight Show with Carson. And Carson being a great host knew when to shut up and let a guest talk, but I think when Sagan was on Carson shut up because he was fascinated with what Sagan would say.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

Sorry, I meant a lack of communicators with the recognition of someone like Sagan. And we need to find a way to get those science communicators on the late night talk shows circuit like Sagan.

[–] hanrahan@slrpnk.net 6 points 6 months ago

We sure could use a guy like Carl Sagan these days though

Much love to Sagan but I don't agree, Sagan would have had the same issue if FB was around.

An example he'd be all in on clinate change like he was even back when he was testifying to congress and you think the digital dipshits be "oh well, if Sagan says it color me convinced" ?

There are others eg Brian Cox, (UK) James Hansen (US and a boat load of others all ignnored.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The article that was posted earlier today about how oil and gas firms are twisting scientists words to make “uncertainty” (which is a confidence interval, not “we’re not sure”) I’m pretty sure we need to stop using certain words. At this point, PR is a major part of scientists jobs. Just like managing communications is a major part of programmers jobs, even though there’s a huge belief that programmers can’t talk to others. I won’t hire someone who can’t work with nor communicate with others. The same should apply to scientists.

[–] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 3 points 6 months ago

Scientists' words will always be twisted, regardless of what words they use. I agree that some words seem to sow confusion even within research fields, but I worry that attempting to change things may lead to an xkcd standards problem

A book that has really stuck with me is "Merchants of a Doubt", which looks at how often the muddying the waters comes from a handful of scientists, who are presumably getting paid a bunch to do so, but not in a way that's easy to debunk. The problem is that science is muddy by nature, so scientists learn how to wade through mud (ideally) and work around and through it. I'm of the belief that the way forward will require for science in general to become more accessible to people in general, because I think the epistemically privileged nature of science is deepening distrust i.e. we are taught to trust science(TM) and only scientists are allowed to challenge other scientists. This makes sense, but I think it fosters a sense of distrust in people who I honestly can't blame for feeling like the system doesn't care about them.

I'm feeling like maybe blind trust in institutions might just be an untenably bad situation, because I'm a scientist and I don't know whether scientific education in the model of "scientific communication happens when the Scientists(TM) come down from their ivory towers and gift the common folk with knowledge, who are not allowed to question or add to this knowledge, unless they become a member of Science(TM) (or they are a person to whom science is done to

[–] grue@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (2 children)

A lot of people don’t like Neil DeGrasse-Tyson, although there seems to be less hate for Bill Nye.

I wonder white the difference could be?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I'm sure that's it for some people and I personally like him, but he does have a bit of an ego on him and I think that turns people off.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Is Bill Nye's ego not at least as large, though?

(I feel like I should point out that I don't think either of them are wrong for having a bit of an ego. It's really hard to be right all the time and surrounded by a sea of idiots without turning into an exasperated jerk -- frankly, I think they should both be commended for resisting assholery as well as they do.)

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I honestly barely pay attention to BIll Nye because I used to watch him on Almost Live, so it's basically impossible for me to take him seriously, so you're asking the wrong person.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Admittedly, I never watched Bill Nye Saves the World, so I don't know firsthand how egotistical (or otherwise) he was. But still, that title alone says something...

I did watch the obscure Planet Green show Living with Ed, however, in which Bill Nye was portrayed as the rival/antagonist and kind of an asshole. Who knows how much that was being played up for the camera, though.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Bill's TV career started in sketch comedy (hence me being unable to take him seriously), so I wouldn't be shocked if it was played up for the cameras.

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 1 points 6 months ago

For me it's just his approach to talk about things. I had hope for him taking the reins of a new Cosmos, but he's not Sagan and it didn't work. As for Bill Nye, I always preferred Beakman for the same reason, personality.

[–] BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

The real problem is in our technologically advanced and prosperous civilization, we no longer have true survival of the fittest to weed out the morons.

[–] Classy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 months ago

"Darwin was way off! Try again!"

I'm honestly bewildered at how wildly obtuse this person is.

[–] UmeU@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

At first I think, this is a bunch of trolls trolling off all over each other, nobody can be this delusional. Then I realize, this sounds like some of my relatives.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

People can absolutely be this delusional.

[–] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa

hol' up

We're saying there were Roswell survivors now? Last I heard we just did an autopsy that was supposed to be kept under wraps.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Is the image not loading for anyone else? If not, here's the direct link: https://removed/FwFR9zv/8uujch.jpg

[–] grue@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago
[–] Potatisen@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Loading in super low resolution, using sync.

[–] nxdefiant@startrek.website 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

This is a sync bug. If you open the post and then click the link, it should open in full res instead of expanding the thumbnail (I'm using sync)

[–] Potatisen@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

That worked! Thanks

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

The image loads fine for me now, but the thumbnail is low res.

[–] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It loaded for me (web browser, using Alexandrite UI), but the link you put in this comment shows removed like in grue's comment

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I didn't put the removed there. I don't know how that happened. It's the website imgbb.

[–] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yeah I've seen that happen before, I think Lemmy (or maybe just this instance) doesn't play nice with that domain for whatever reason.

[–] Tanoh@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

It was probably used for spam in the past, so they added a rule to trash all links to that domain.

[–] Omega_Man@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

Kind of reminds me of that old sub with the bots spewing gibberish at each other.

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

TBF to the sister in Christ, someone is taking the Giants down.

[–] NielsBohron@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

My God, is there nowhere I can be safe from being reminded that my beloved SFG are utter trash this year?

[–] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

At least now you know who to blame