Trust me, I'm a scientist (and not an advertising exec or journalist)

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,347
741
That all depends on where the money for the grant is coming from. I'm sure which scientists Exxon/Mobil consider "trustworthy" to deliver the goods and which scientists Greenpeace consider "trustworthy" to deliver the goods are not the same lists.
I'm sure Exxon/Mobil and Greenpeace don't care about trustworthiness of particular scientists, but just look for results worth spinning.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
990
484
I'm sure Exxon/Mobil and Greenpeace don't care about trustworthiness of particular scientists, but just look for results worth spinning.
Which is just another way of saying what was said above that led to AlanF's comment to which I was responding in the comment you quoted.

"Research scientists working in grant-financed environments are motivated by giving the grantor what they want, whether that is the unbiased truth or a preconceived conclusion, in order to continue the flow of dollars to their research institution."
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,745
3,075
Which is just another way of saying what was said above that led to AlanF's comment to which I was responding in the comment you quoted.

"Research scientists working in grant-financed environments are motivated by giving the grantor what they want, whether that is the unbiased truth or a preconceived conclusion, in order to continue the flow of dollars to their research institution."
You did write in your post you are quoting that those in organizations like Exxon/Mobil are really engineers, not scientists.

"Scientists" working for private enterprises developing products are more engineers than scientists, regardless of what their degree is.
 

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,347
741
Which is just another way of saying what was said above that led to AlanF's comment to which I was responding in the comment you quoted.

"Research scientists working in grant-financed environments are motivated by giving the grantor what they want, whether that is the unbiased truth or a preconceived conclusion, in order to continue the flow of dollars to their research institution."
Hello?

I am saying that no matter how "trustworthy" scientists are, there will always be results for advertising executives and politicians to misinterpret for spinning.

How is that "just another way of saying"...?
 

takesome1

EOS 6D MK II
Aug 23, 2013
1,486
119
98
Licking, Missouri
If a Scientist quotes a study that interviewed random people about "trustworthiness", knowing that those people interviewed were just random people on the internet and then makes the statement:

"So when it comes to considering the merits of cameras and lenses, you know whom to trust more! "

Doing so knowing that the research and backup for this statement is flawed, then debating the integrity and trustworthiness of the scientific community.

Is there no irony here?
 
  • Love
Reactions: Michael Clark

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,347
741
If a Scientist quotes a study that interviewed random people about "trustworthiness", knowing that those people interviewed were just random people on the internet and then makes the statement:

"So when it comes to considering the merits of cameras and lenses, you know whom to trust more! "

Doing so knowing that the research and backup for this statement is flawed, then debating the integrity and trustworthiness of the scientific community.

Is there no irony here?
I took it as a joke played with the equivocacy of "you know whom to trust more" (descriptive vs. normative sense).

YMMV, of course.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanF

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,745
3,075
If a Scientist quotes a study that interviewed random people about "trustworthiness", knowing that those people interviewed were just random people on the internet and then makes the statement:

"So when it comes to considering the merits of cameras and lenses, you know whom to trust more! "

Doing so knowing that the research and backup for this statement is flawed, then debating the integrity and trustworthiness of the scientific community.

Is there no irony here?
As Kit wrote just above it's meant to be taken with a pinch of salt, a joke with a hint of truth behind it. I very rarely use emojis to signal jokes as this side of the pond we are more used to picking up these nuances whereas others elsewhere like spelling them out. I will occasionally use an emoji if makes it clear I am not being rude to someone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aussie shooter

takesome1

EOS 6D MK II
Aug 23, 2013
1,486
119
98
Licking, Missouri
As Kit wrote just above it's meant to be taken with a pinch of salt, a joke with a hint of truth behind it. I very rarely use emojis to signal jokes as this side of the pond we are more used to picking up these nuances whereas others elsewhere like spelling them out. I will occasionally use an emoji if makes it clear I am not being rude to someone.

Well only 23% trust Pollsters, what does that say about the credibility of their Poll.
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,745
3,075
Well only 23% trust Pollsters, what does that say about the credibility of their Poll.
As I have written at least twice before, it is only an opinion poll, and opinions are opinions not facts. It so happens that the poll was conducted by Ipsos-Mori, which is one of the best opinion pollsters. Only 37% trust ordinary men or women, so if you are an ordinary person, what does that say about your credibility?
 

SteveC

M50 & T6i
Sep 3, 2019
348
197
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." Benjamin Disraeli.
I was going to say "I thought that was Mark Twain" but then I decided to check. This is what Wikipedia has to say:

"The phrase was popularized in the United States by Mark Twain (among others), who attributed it to the British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." However, the phrase is not found in any of Disraeli's works and the earliest known appearances were years after his death. Several other people have been listed as originators of the quote, and it is often erroneously attributed to Twain himself.[1]"

So it appears that Disraeli never said it. Mark Twain did, but he didn't originate it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,745
3,075
I was going to say "I thought that was Mark Twain" but then I decided to check. This is what Wikipedia has to say:

"The phrase was popularized in the United States by Mark Twain (among others), who attributed it to the British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." However, the phrase is not found in any of Disraeli's works and the earliest known appearances were years after his death. Several other people have been listed as originators of the quote, and it is often erroneously attributed to Twain himself.[1]"

So it appears that Disraeli never said it. Mark Twain did, but he didn't originate it.
Wikipedia didn't even get rated in the opinion poll so why should we believe it?
 

takesome1

EOS 6D MK II
Aug 23, 2013
1,486
119
98
Licking, Missouri
As I have written at least twice before, it is only an opinion poll, and opinions are opinions not facts. It so happens that the poll was conducted by Ipsos-Mori, which is one of the best opinion pollsters. Only 37% trust ordinary men or women, so if you are an ordinary person, what does that say about your credibility?
It depends, if you are asking me for medical advice hopefully you are not one of the 37%.
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,745
3,075
It depends, if you are asking me for medical advice hopefully you are not one of the 37%.
Medical doctors have come in for particular abuse in this thread so it's fortunate that Ipsos-Mori didn't run their opinion poll here.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
990
484
You did write in your post you are quoting that those in organizations like Exxon/Mobil are really engineers, not scientists.
No I did not. I said that when Exxon/Mobil and the like hire outside "expert" climate scientists to report on things that have nothing to do with product development they expect to get the result for which they have paid.