h a l f b a k e r yAlas, poor spelling!
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
|
Sadly, if people are prepared to do things on the basis of no evidence, they have shown that they entirely reject an evidence-based approach. This rejection of the importance of evidence means that presenting them with negative evidence (or even positive evidence) will not change their conviction. What might be more effective is an evidence-free approach. For example, someone they trust (a religious or cultural figure) might say that the ghosts of their ancestors came to them in a dream and said they'd been getting it wrong all this time - it's not rhino horn you take for virility, it's seagull droppings. |
|
|
// they have shown that they entirely reject an evidence-based approach // |
|
|
Not so. They believe in myths and legends which for them constitute evidence. We just have to tell a better story. |
|
|
// The simple solution would be to infiltrate organisations // |
|
|
Regarding the count of dead rangers in and around wildlife refuges I doubt the use of the word "simple". |
|
|
To compromise science will do more harm than good. Anti-
intellectuals are doing well enough without any actual
ammunition. |
|
|
We have done this before. |
|
|
From the link, //Release a study showing that rino horn causes your wang to fall off. Fire up the photoshop and release pictures, fake inverviews and case histories etc.//
doctorremulac3, Aug 23 2014 |
|
| |