File:FLICC techniques of science denial.png: Difference between revisions

From Green Policy
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 15: Line 15:
Fourth, there’s cherry picking, which focuses on specific pieces of data, often out of context, while excluding any data that conflicts with the desired conclusion. […]  
Fourth, there’s cherry picking, which focuses on specific pieces of data, often out of context, while excluding any data that conflicts with the desired conclusion. […]  


Fifth and finally, when someone disagrees with an overwhelming scientific consensus, there is always the resort to conspiracy theories. How else would you explain that all the world’s experts, scientific organizations, and journals agree on something you disagree with?”
Fifth and finally, when someone disagrees with an overwhelming scientific consensus, there is always the resort to conspiracy theories. Attempt to undermine the facts, evidence and science by introducing a conspiracy theory. […] 


~
~

Revision as of 23:03, 16 June 2020


From Video by John Cook as he explains what he calls the 'Five Characteristics of Science Denial'.

You can remember them with the acronym “FLICC,” and they stand for Fake Experts, Logical Fallacies, Impossible Expectations, Cherry Picking, and Conspiracy Theories.


“First, fake experts are used to create the impression of an ongoing scientific debate. The general public rely on expert opinion as a guide for their own beliefs about science. For this reason, casting doubt on a scientific consensus is a key strategy for those looking to manufacture doubt about the science. Fake experts appear to be highly qualified but don’t have actual expertise in the relevant scientific field […]

Number two is logical fallacies. These are logically false arguments that lead to an invalid conclusion. […]

The third characteristic of science denial involves impossible expectations. This demands unrealistic standards of proof before acting on the science. […]

Fourth, there’s cherry picking, which focuses on specific pieces of data, often out of context, while excluding any data that conflicts with the desired conclusion. […]

Fifth and finally, when someone disagrees with an overwhelming scientific consensus, there is always the resort to conspiracy theories. Attempt to undermine the facts, evidence and science by introducing a conspiracy theory. […]

~

File history

Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.

Date/TimeThumbnailDimensionsUserComment
current22:46, 16 June 2020Thumbnail for version as of 22:46, 16 June 2020448 × 353 (46 KB)Siterunner (talk | contribs)