While I am sympathetic to people concerned with the amount of scientific trash talk online, I have to agree with the basic thesis:
Evidence-based policy is important. The alternative is gut-feel based populist wingnuttery.
To stand against Trumpism, evidence-based policy needs to be above reproach. The correct way to be above reproach is to be flawless, not to silence informed criticism.
Yeah, and this extends even to the purest studies of nature, like mathematics, as we know from Gödel's incompleteness theorems. It's just that e.g. whether or not the Rieman Hypothesis is true doesn't influence whether the state cracks down on a certain demographic.
LOL. Reminded me of a friend who skydove/skydived. He read a magazine about the sport, which had sprinkled throughout concise descriptions of skydiving accidents.
They had one thing in common - cause of death:impact.
Evidence-based policy is important. The alternative is gut-feel based populist wingnuttery.
To stand against Trumpism, evidence-based policy needs to be above reproach. The correct way to be above reproach is to be flawless, not to silence informed criticism.