|
|
|
|
|
|
by flyinRyan
4956 days ago
|
|
|
>What would you think of an oncologist whose patients never contract serious, life-threatening cancer? Since the science tells us that his methods reduce the rate of cancer (all metrics we can test to a degree), I'd think he's doing good work. TSA, on the other hand, has been been called out by many actual security professionals for having shit practices that don't actually work. They're basically pulling a rain man scam and people like you are buying into it because you think there's no way to prove it hasn't magically stopped something we didn't even hear about. Actual professionals who don't have money invested in one conclusion or the other are saying it isn't helping anything. |
|
|
Yes, that's true, but (a) those "professionals" have no better logical basis than you do, and (b) this doesn't change the fact that you were using flawed logic, my only reason for posting. The fact that there haven't been any terrorist arrests at airports doesn't mean what you seem to think.
> They're basically pulling a rain man scam ...
This is counterproductive. It might be true, it might be false, but it doesn't follow from the evidence. Again, I'm not taking a position on the TSA, only the logic.
> Actual professionals who don't have money invested in one conclusion or the other are saying it isn't helping anything.
Name one who is using an argument more scientific than "they haven't caught any terrorists!" And again, this is not about whether the claim is true, this is about the basis for deciding whether it's true.