Interesting thing re: Cause of Bias? - #198 by claudiu .
When I looked into global warming before, I found I would alternate between believing in it and believing against it.
I would read “denier” websites and believe all the evidence was compelling. Then I would watch potholer54 video debunking it and believe in the “science” side. Then I’d read other sites replying to potholer’s point and believe against it. Then watch more pro-sites and believe for it, etc.
But once I was able to dig into the core of the premise, that it lays upon, and see the simple argument of why it doesn’t make sense – none of that happens anymore! I no longer believe in it or believe against it. It’s just that the argument makes perfect sense and is so simple to understand. It’s a factual basis.
The other thing that stood out as I wrote it is that – it is entirely possible to be wrong! It is refutable. It makes definitive statements that can be disproven with the right experiments. It is falsifiable, i.e. scientific. And if I see a counterargument that makes sense, my understanding will adjust. I suspect I won’t since Richard already spent weeks digging into it on one occasion, and definitely more since then (as Vineeto said they refreshed their memory on it and looked into anything new recently).
That doesn’t mean there isn’t a counterargument out-there or that it is valid… but just like with actual freedom and Enlightenment, someone already did all the work so it’s probably going to hold. But I will see for myself 
.