Cause of Bias?

B It is all quite risible. And yet, according to ‘JonnyPitt’ on the “Cause of Bias” thread at the Discuss Actualism Online forum – who apart from currently being in a state of denial[](javascript:void(0)) [](javascript:void(0)) and rank absurdity[](javascript:void(0)) also appears to have plugged that hole in his superiority complex[](javascript:void(0)) of 2013 vintage – it is both Richard and Vineeto who have cognitive limitations similar to “tone deafness” or “dyslexia” [](javascript:void(0)) and are (allegedly) on the record with some “verifiably bat-shit crazy” opinions[](javascript:void(0)) as well as, of late, being “stubbornly irrational” to boot[](javascript:void(0)), and not those mathematically abstractive guys-n-gals at Quantumville.

Sheesh. Tx @Claudiu. Maybe next time don’t misrepresent me so poorly. I was merely trying to get to a physical reason for extreme cognitive bias. Only using examples of poor arguments made by Vineeto and others to establish why cause of extreme bias may be physical and not psychological. At other times I noted how even those examples weren’t necessary when I asked how people (AF or not) use poor arguments when good ones are readily available. I don’t recall ever saying no good arguments exist to support their conclusions. I wasn’t even questioning their conclusions.

At any rate, when it comes to global warming - To me it’s a public policy question and I’ve always put policy questions in probability terms. Is GW probably made-made or is it probably not? If the probability of it being made-made are greater than zero than some percentage of GDP should be used to reduce emissions and thus reduce the odds of global warming getting worse. Not being a scientist, I simplified the variables. Is it a coincidence the ice caps are receding during the same geological era of human population explosion and the industrial revolution? My dumb brain says that since 200 years is not a long time at all, geologically speaking, it’s probably not a coincidence. Therefore, I would support more rather than less emission control. As it stands, here in the USA, one group says zero percentage of GDP should be transferred by the government over to emission control and the other group says a tiny little bit should.

Here’s my quote containing the verifiably batshit crazy comment:

So if that’s what he meant then how can AF person think like that? And here’s the deal, I’m not saying that what he meant when he said New World Order. I don’t know what he meant. But I can see him have such an opinion. Craig too. I can see him having such an opinion. Because they both are on the record with some verifiably batshit crazy opinions.

I agree that is superiority complex-esque. In fact, my thread helped me greatly with putting my various opinions into the far-from-certainty category. Many of them were already there but some of them like “Trump is a completely unprincipled con man” or “the CCP sucks big time” were still very much in the complete certainty category. And it will take time for them to move out of there into a less superiority complex space. My global warming opinion was never in that space, however. Can I note how I said that on February 6th and our private conversation started on February 11th? Our private conversation deserves more consideration than you gave it.

I was too insistent on the AF people can be stubbornly irrational thing. I didn’t really need to establish any examples. I could have just left it open ended and moved on to the meat of the conversation.

That was my quote containing the “stubbornly irrational” comment. Not even remotely dogmatic, I don’t think.