Is PS an echo chamber?

[T.j_Runyon]

@PDPrice

All the scientists are evolutionists as far as I know.

Because that’s pretty much all scientists in general…

[T.j_Runyon]

@John_Harshman

Not too sure of that.

There are disagreements here all time between the “evolutionists”. That’s not a sign of an echo chamber @PDPrice

[John_Harshman]

You folks are mistaking what I disagree about. It’s not whether PS is an echo chamber. It’s about the definition of “echo chamber” advanced ty @Timothy_Horton.

[Tim]

I would tend to agree with @John_Harshman

Echo chambers can as easily develop due to self-selection bias as by being imposed.

And I do think that this forum does have a degree of self-selection, towards those with a high regard for empirical evidence – mostly scientific evidence (unsurprising given the number of scientists involved), but also demographic evidence and so forth.

Speaking for myself, I don’t find that bias detrimental – but hey, I self-selected here myself – and I’m not a YEC trying to make my case against such a headwind.

[John_Harshman]

@Timothy_Horton

If unpopular arguments are shouted down or drowned out then they aren’t being allowed to be heard.

I’m sorry you feel insulted, but what you said doesn’t mean what you now say you meant. You said “heard or posted”, and the fact is that “posted” has a meaning.

[Timothy_Horton]

@John_Harshman

@Timothy_Horton

An echo chamber is defined as a place where only one side of an argument is allowed to be heard or posted.

Not too sure of that. I find, for example, that Pharyngula is a bit of an echo chamber on political issues, as disenting views are promptly shouted down by the majority. You can post anything you want, but if you care at all about the responses, the piling on can be a disincentive. Only the trolls seem interested in bucking the majority. I know I generally don’t bother to respond. Why Evolution Is True is similar to a lesser degree. If not true echo chambers, they’re at least echo chamber-ish.

My definition covered that. If unpopular arguments are shouted down or drowned out then they aren’t being allowed to be heard. If you don’t understand the words as they are written you can always ask for clarification.

[Timothy_Horton]

@John_Harshman

@Timothy_Horton

If unpopular arguments are shouted down or drowned out then they aren’t being allowed to be heard.

I’m sorry you feel insulted, but what you said doesn’t mean what you now say you meant. You said “heard or posted”, and the fact is that “posted” has a meaning

“Heard” and “Posted” are two different actions. “Heard” has a meaning different from “posted”. You don’t have ESP and I don’t appreciate you trying to tell me what I thought.

[T.j_Runyon]

@John_Harshman

You folks are mistaking what I disagree about.

I was just using your disagreement with @Timothy_Horton as an example that there is disagreement among the regulars here on a number of topics and everyone has challenged everyone before.

[thoughtful (Valerie (non-scientist))]

@swamidass

I don’t think we are an echo chamber, but @PDPrice you certainly are a minority here. There are other YECs here (@r_speir, @thoughtful, @J.E.S, @stcordova), but you are out numbered.

You also post in a way that elicits some strong reactions from the “other side”.

I found it to be hostile at first. But then I just decided to take my little light and let it shine. Abraham after all only had his household, Lot, Abimelech, and Melchizedek and their households who believed as he did.

Plus, I’m not a scientist, so there’s no point in being defensive, or even trying to defend myself unless someone asks. I think YEC should really just forgo being defensive. It’s a Hebrews 11 belief, not a Thomas one.

[CrisprCAS9]

@swamidass

I don’t think we are an echo chamber, but @PDPrice you certainly are a minority here.

This forum generally elevates the comments from minority positions, which is both commendable and the opposite of what an echo chamber would do. If this were an echo chamber, I would expect minority-view threads to be either moderated out of existence or buried by lack of participation, not 6 out of the top 10 non-pinned threads.

[PDPrice (Paul Price)]

This is a fair comment. What you described is what normally happens on Reddit, for example. The lack of a ‘downvote’ feature here is a saving grace.

@CrisprCAS9

not 6 out of the top 10 non-pinned threads.

…however, it is useful to note that the reason these minority-view threads are on the top is that everybody is participating with a view to piling on their attacks against that minority position. I’ve been doing my part to give back to the PS community by increasing participation.

[swamidass (S. Joshua Swamidass)]

@PDPrice

@CrisprCAS9

not 6 out of the top 10 non-pinned threads.

…however, it is useful to note that the reason these minority-view threads are on the top is that everybody is participating with a view to piling on their attacks against that minority position.

Why is that useful to note? Many of those threads were split by moderators. We have the ability to take away your visibility but have chosen to protect it. That is not by accident or a quirk of the forum…

[AllenWitmerMiller (Semi-Expired Professor & Minister.)]

@thoughtful

Noah’s flood is an event described in the Bible as global.

@swamidass

It is certainly not described as “global”. Don’t add to scripture that way!

I should probably clarify that I certainly have no problems with my Christian brethren who happen to assume that the Noahic Flood was global. It is a very tradition view and it was certainly my experience growing up in a fundamentalist church.

However, the claim that the Bible specifically states that the flood was global is a different kind of assertion. The Bible writers apparently had no reason to describe the scope of the flood in such detail. And they didn’t.

That said, the fact that the global-flood topic has been so popular here whenever it arises illustrates that Peaceful Science is far from an echo chamber.

[John_Harshman]

@AllenWitmerMiller

However, the claim that the Bible specifically states that the flood was global is a different kind of assertion.

Agreed, that’s wrong. But the story as told makes no sense as a story unless the flood was global. It has to cover all the land in the world, or at least all the land that has people or animals on it. You could claim that some people don’t count, or that some animals don’t count, but there’s really no support for that.

[stcordova (Salvador Cordova)]

Sorry for the late reply, I haven’t visited here in a long while.

All I can say is I appreciate this forum and its been valuable, especially the thread on my nylonase preprint.

[AlanFox]

Hey, Sal! Cosi va?

[stcordova (Salvador Cordova)]

Hi AlanFox,

I’m fine. Swamped with work, and worried about the future of the USA, especially for the plight of conservative Christians.

Hope you are well.

Sal