Debunking can be a fun way to find an audience in science communication, but I think it can be over-relied on.
We should be celebrating more than we are defending, not just because it’s less miserable, but also because it’s good marketing!
We should be celebrating more than we are defending, not just because it’s less miserable, but also because it’s good marketing!
Comments
It’s not like misinformation and science-denialism is at an all-time high or anything. The silly folks just need to celebrate more! It’s just good marketing hehe
Hank is playing by a different rule set and getting smashed
😒😒😒
Social media and influencer culture has warped everyone's idea of how public debate actually works.
I don’t want to be known for calling people out; I want to be known for calling them in!
Fly and drive often to burn the future
Or
Study global warming with https://PaulBeckwith.net
Not saying it should never be done, but maybe not the best focus? Spread the fun and true and don’t frame it all as a response to crazy
like this maybe?
The flat earth debate demonstrates that even when presented with physical proof, science deniers will go to insane lengths to maintain their beliefs.
Not much evidence that it does any good.
"Building an audience" often seems more about establishing an "in-group" though.
y’all find yourself in.
BUNKING?
we all need a more collaborative experience of the scientific process.
president.
You catch more flies with sugar than turpentine, but you catch the most with 💩. I think good discourse takes a conscious decision to value positivity and neuanced truth higher than one's view count.
"We spent a weekend with a semi-professional on this topic and since he couldn't pull this off then this documented, highly skilled, medieval technique was never possible. Debunk-dunking!"
But there's a significant problem with fraud in science even when globalist lizard people conspiracies aren't in any way involved, and it's worth debunking too.
"Look at this cool thing about the world!" and "Look how wrong this guy is"
is the difference between
"Science is about learning" and "Science is about being right"
More like
Googledebunking
In contrast I really enjoyed Steve Mold and Electrobooms feud about various things
Start with the debunk, show an accurate and truthful perspective, then link further to more information about the subject.
Sometimes however, the most effective option is ridicule.
Vaccines? More information.
The earth is flat and used to be filled with giants? Nah.
I have found that the folks who do this often still do debunk things but they do so in a way of 'this is what we thought before, this is what we know now, cool right?" kind of way. 1/
1. I'm not being told I am wrong, and I am an idiot. Even if I *am* wrong about something.
2. Their passion and exitment about sharing these things is often infecious. 2/
Part of this graphic clarifies what to expect. Part addresses common misunderstandings.
Source (WHO) in next post.
14 July 2021
Vaccines offer protection from viruses, like smallpox, measles, influenza, etc..
https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/vaccine-efficacy-effectiveness-and-protection
They are using scientist to play their game by challenging their science. They tell lies and science jumps. Stop playing their games.
Debunkings often seem redundant and unnecessary to the informed, but there still exists a need for resources combatting the current misinfo. At least in my experience.
It taught me that almost anything sounds good until you hear its counter argument.
Put me on team debunking.
Honestly...I had just done a bunch of my own math about the pyramids and wanted to present it somewhere. And @davidmiano.bsky.social was like "great, let's stick it in this debunk video."
Sometimes debunks just gets more eyeballs on educational content.
Miniminuteman does a good job of mixing debunking with actual education.
https://youtu.be/BLP6K8xm0Kc
you really have to talk in other people's language.
HA HA! Take THAT Globists!
/s
the assignment is very simple, the methodology and the science checks out, or it does not, the data is clear, or it is not; that's it
But, as we’ve seen only too well lately, debunking isn’t strong enough people just keep believing the bunk.