🤓 Check out my new quiz app ➜ http://quizwithit.com/
You all know that I am critical of some developments in physics and tech. I believe it is for this reason that I get a lot of comments of the sort “I am so disappointed in you that you fell for the climate hoax, I thought you are a sceptic”. In this video, I want to explain how my experience in physics had me lose trust in scientists, and that indeed I was highly sceptical of climate change a decade ago. I looked at the science — and scientists — very closely. Unfortunately it turned out that climate change is not a hoax.
#science
46 Comments
🤓 You can now collect points and create your own quizzes on my new quiz app ➜ http://quizwithit.com/
Thanks!
flat earth is a psychological operation to discredit ideas that the CIA doesn't like.
It's proper science if you get the funding.
I do social_behavioral research and " try" to be a " scientist"…. It "is" hard. 😂
I could… trust science, but I don't trust scientists.
Trustung scientists is for the non-scientists..
I told ya, I told ya. Any branch of study where a grad student will offer his grandmother’s glass eye for a grant, spells trouble.
Gibberish.
I'm a scientist. You shouldn't trust scientists. I have this unique insight, though, so I'm somehow intellectually above any sort of conclusions I might assert as I've provided that mea culpa, which a genuine actor would never do. Therefore, you should trust me, which would be wrong.
Physics, much like engineering, is field with many specialties that don't confer a special knowledge outside of those specialties. For example, an expert in large gravitationally bound systems shouldn't be expected to have meaningful knowledge on the dynamics of atmospheric exchanges of energy. Not only how CO2 levels affect climate, but even whether the greenhouse effect is a significant factor in climate.
Physics can't be falsified by physics either. You need a materialistic view. Particles made out of particles made out of particles. And only particles explain particles. You see this has its limitations. And yes I know "waves", but then it becomes math.
climate changes for whatever reason man nature or both, inevitably its going to have the
outcome of global, national and individual control which will funded by public green tax'.
dress it up in whatever reasoning one wants its gonna mean more big business and government
is what I and most are resistant towards.
people are not blindly denying, they are opposed to it because there are other potential causes
of climate change which are not even debated.
the way language is used around climate change is framed as if everyone agrees except for some
stupid flat earther's.
You main point is fatally undermined by your own headline. Yes, scientists make mistakes and certain approaches may lack rigour, but in totality science itself has never been more important in trying to address the problems of our age brought on by the same people who will delight in such headlines.
In what world is studying ESP "not scientific." If you think the world is MATERIAL (which it is not) and reality is only what you can SEE and TOUCH (which it isn't) then you are not a scientist, you're just an ostrich with your head in the ground. Nobody should listen to you, you sound insane.
Wth are with these comments? Science doesn't say anything, it's just a process. People are the ones to be questioned.
When I saw the title of this video I immediately thought about the science being fairly correct…but that the social manipulation/changes that takes place, the human race's inability to use critical thinking is the bigger problem. We have evolved to have global, instantanious communication but very few people have developed the required critical thinking processes that can put things in the correct perspective. Everyone has an opinion, but very few has a responsibility and we need to correct this before anything else we do as humans will work. But that's just my opinion…
Thanks for telling it as it is, Sabine!
Josef Mengele was a scientist.
Woo, having gone through the comments below, it seems you really have appealed to the lowest common denominator. But hey, no problem right, isn't is all about the clickbait?
It was Dr Michael E (Piltdown) Mann who initiated a decade long lawsuit because he was called a charlatan in connection with his hockey stick graph. He should have lost that case because of the chicanery involved, where he "hid the decline." That is as bad as the fraudulent Piltdown Man. You will be well aware of this deception, & that he has not been banished for ever in shame from science, is itself good enough reason not to trust scientists. As for you, it is with much regret that I watch you evermore toeing the elitist line. Your own cynicism with science is understandable, but to actively take part in the deception is very disappointing.
The Lancet sold out over the clot shots.
Scientists need money. Some will do or say anything to get it.
Is using RCP 8.5 going to give you a bad result everytime? Guaranteeing doomsday.
in 2024 the definition of scientists is "paid shills who say whatever their handlers want them to say"
Hmm …. Reasons why I don't trust every scientists.
Anyway scientists are the agent of science. And so far, we live in a world of scientific and technological development.
ESP science is literally the gold standard of scientific method and produced the most clear and reliable repeatable results.
It also laid the foundation of rigorous scientific inquiry into other areas
Some scientific sounding Ramblings 😂
This video encourages viewers to think critically about science instead of blindly trusting individuals or institutions. Sabine openly addresses her own biases and concerns, fostering an atmosphere of trust and transparency, which is great. However, including a product promotion at the end might detract from the video's overall message, leading some to question the video's true purpose.
Scientific institutions are political institutions, that's the problem. You are supposed to do science without ideological influences or political goals.
How can we rely on logic, data, and maths in subjects such as biology or history?
Fear-based pseudo science is on the rise because angry ideological camps are on the rise. One example you didn't mention involves the clear, long-understood method of determining who is male and who is female: chromosomes. Medical science has been intimidated away from facts and into dogma. This has happened before. Copernicus paid the price for going against the prevailing dogma of his time.
Anything that involves humans is corrupt.
Unfortunately todays science deniers is anyone who questions a climate scientist. That you so freely use that term makes you untrustworthy. I personally do not know any science deniers only people who do not trust politicians. It's worse now since covid, and that is not getting the attention it deserves.
Dr. Hossenfelder,
I know you mean well, and you have indeed identified a real problem that you want to help correct. But your final conclusion is unfortunately flawed. Surely, you understand that everyone you are criticizing already firmly believes they are using data, maths, and logic successfully! Telling people to trust data, maths, and logic isn't going to help anything. They are tools. Your own videos make it clear that they can be used well, used poorly, or even intentionally abused. Those tools on their own won't lead people to the skills or clarity they need. You correctly identify fear as a problem that corrupts science, but you fail to see how your own fears have introduced many non-scientific ideas (maybe not bad, but definitely non-scientific) into your own videos. There's a better answer. I hope you find it.
Here's a suggestion. Spend a little more time thinking about what actually makes some PEOPLE trustworthy. Is it just because they use data and maths and logic? I think there is a better answer (and you're going in the right direction when you start looking at personal motives). Once you find that, it might lead to a better way to find trustworthy ideas. As you've indicated, you can't figure out everything on your own. You can't become an expert at everything. At some point you will have to trust.
Sincerely,
A fellow physicist and critical thinker
avid fan/first comment
I'm a fine arts major. I don't trust scientists, either. That's odd, 'cause my stepson I raised from eight years old to the status of graduate student is attending the Bohr Institute in Copenhagen. He's interested in the much-neglected subject; gravity. As he eased into the life of theoretical physics I tried to convey to him what seems to have happened to the domain of professional physicists. He, too, is quite an idealist and is in pursuit of knowledge with scant thought regarding income. It was obvious a head-on collision was inevitable, and I wanted to prepare him.
For me, I write fiction. I'm always amazed at how similar are my efforts to be published as a novelist, and the professional requirements of theoretical physicists with regard to that; publication. Though, the underlying intent is quite dissimilar. I intend to create a 250-page lie loosely based on truth. Physicists intend to….no, wait….
We in this household love your work as the most important feature in our internet experience, second only to Wikipedia. Thanks for your efforts. May they continue.
Deniers? Falling into the label traps too. I'd have thought you'd be smarter than that. I can use labels too, like data manipulators.
For the record, most people don't mistrust science per se. Raw science should be able to provide a clear conclusion, but when you rely on limited sampling, restrict the samples, and utilize modeling that can (and has been) 'tweaked' to meet a pre-determined objective… That's not science any longer. We mistrust the people and institutions that utilize data bias and sensationalism to manipulate governments and populations into spending money on industries and projects they directly profit from. The solar 'revolution' is not quite turning out to be what was hoped. EVs are causing far greater ecological and humanitarian damage than can be justified because of lithium and cobalt mining. Wind farm projects that are now falling into dis-repair for lack of financial viability while continuing to lobby for new projects for the same failed technology. Good money after bad. Who's benefiting? Certainly not the people initially intended because the original projects are failing leaving zero gains.
Well, duh. One of the foundations of science is that it is repeatable. Go do the experiment yourself and see what results you get and what you make of it. You don't have to take anyone's word for anything. In fact it is better if you don't and repeat the experiment yourself.
If you want a good reason not to trust science, just do a deep dive in to covid.
I have felt this way for a long. Are we causing it. If the funding only goes one way, how do we know whether previous climate studies are actual true?
what if scientists are charlatans?
how would you know if they were?
or weren't??
let me say again for emphasis….. "KNOW"
??
This video is a good display of how ee are going into a Dark Age of mistrust in the institutions that order the trur knowledge that we have.
Soon we will have no way to differentiate an educated opinion from a random intetnet dude.
Data are only wrong when gathered using faulty methods. Taking temperatures in a city without taking the heat island effect into account.
So don’t trust particle physicists, but the idiots who have been making up alarmist predictions that don’t come true are just fine. Sorry, stop talking to the “climate Scientists” and start looking at the data manipulation.
We heard nothing from the climate scientists when the Nord Stream Pipeline was blown up through orders from Joe Biden's State Department. Scientists say what they're
paid to say.
Sabine does not trust science and scientists because "climate denier" scientists scared climate alarmist "scientists" to such extent that they are afraid to say how bad "climate change" really is. Did I get it right?
Multiverses and time warps are just fun and games compared to the real world consequences of bad climate science, or bad medicine.