|
|
|
|
|
|
by epistasis
961 days ago
|
|
|
Are these the concerns of people who study ecosystems deeply, and dedicate their lives to environmental protection through understanding it deeply? Or are they the concerns of people who don't know much, though they care deeply? I find these folks often pursue actions with great passion that are effectively neutral or sometimes even detrimental to the environment. You say that most mistakes of the past have been made after careful consideration, but I do not believe that is the case at all. Most disasters, like the dumping of chemicals from semiconducting manufacturing in Silicon Valley that created so many superfund sites, was just carelessness and complete lack of concern or study. |
|
|
You’re failing to consider the opposite bias, where professionals whose income and prestige depends on a particular idea fail to critically assess it and judge themselves based on their motivations rather than outcomes — and outsiders who only see the claims and outcomes have a less biased view.
That’s the case for gain-of-function research:
- the US banned it despite expert opinions
- a rogue expert circumvented that ban by outsourcing the work to China
- that Chinese lab leaked the studied virus, causing a global pandemic
- the rogue scientist panicked and bribed several peers to help him cover that up and claim a “natural” origin
- millions of people are dead due to hubris and personal biases