Op-ed: what I learned from debating with trolls

[Underseer]

http://theconversation.com/what-i-learned-from-debating-science-with-trolls-30514

This article covers things that are common across every anti-science movement from anti-vaxx to creationism to anthropogenic climate change denial to anti-GMO to you name it. Most of the specific references are to climate change denialists, but these arguments are widely applicable, and I find the same rhetoric being used in my own discussion with anti-science people.

This covers a lot of subjects, so I wasn't sure whether to post this in Pseudoscience, Religion vs. Science, or even the main Science forum, so if any mods wanna move it to a better location, please do.

Anyway, while I've encountered plenty of these arguments before (you wouldn't believe how common the Gelileo Gambit is), the author puts some good perspective on things, and I may incorporate some of this stuff into my own discussions with anti-science nuts.

I thought this might be a useful resource for others.

 

[scombrid]

But I thought the debunkers were the trolls, at least that's what the anti-vax/anti-gmo/truther/birther/chemtrail-HAARP/AGW-deniers call me when I refute them in order to collect my monthly shill payments.

Anyway, I disagree that the science deniers are "trolls". Trolls are Kevin Martin types that are trolling for LoLs and just being dicks for the fun of it; i.e. they don't believe their hype. The anti-science folks that are cherry picking their experts and distorting science to support their arguments are mostly true believers in some religion or another. They aren't trolling when they disagree. They really believe that the Seralini study conclusively proved that Roundup and Roundup-Ready corn meal causes cancer or that NEXRAD controls the weather or that contrails are a government spray program.

 

[Malintent]

But I thought the debunkers were the trolls, at least that's what the anti-vax/anti-gmo/truther/birther/chemtrail-HAARP/AGW-deniers call me when I refute them in order to collect my monthly shill payments.

Anyway, I disagree that the science deniers are "trolls". Trolls are Kevin Martin types that are trolling for LoLs and just being dicks for the fun of it; i.e. they don't believe their hype. The anti-science folks that are cherry picking their experts and distorting science to support their arguments are mostly true believers in some religion or another. They aren't trolling when they disagree. They really believe that the Seralini study conclusively proved that Roundup and Roundup-Ready corn meal causes cancer or that NEXRAD controls the weather or that contrails are a government spray program.

... the dumbing down of English.

"Trolling" now is defined as "doing something unwanted".

In other news...

"Literally" now means "Figuratively".. or "Greatly". Not "Precisely True"
"Ironic" now means "Coincidental". Not "The implied meaning is the opposite of the actual meaning"
"Hacking" means following more than one link from a Google search to reveal publicly disclosed information". Not "Gaining access to protected resources though weaknesses in security controls".

But whatever... Kids these days.. Can't live with them, can't kill them.

 

[Underseer]

Yeah, the word "troll" seems to have shifted its definition from something fairly specific to "anyone I don't like."

"Ironic" now means "Coincidental". Not "The implied meaning is the opposite of the actual meaning"

Uh, are you sure you're not getting "ironic" mixed up with facetious?

 

[Underseer]

"Hacking" means following more than one link from a Google search to reveal publicly disclosed information". Not "Gaining access to protected resources though weaknesses in security controls".

Actually, that is a more correct use of the term, but you would need to know the origin of the colloquialism.

"Hack" is old, old slang for enthusiast. Computer enthusiasts borrowed the term and applied it to anyone who spent a lot of time screwing around with or tinkering with computers. Restricting the meaning to apply only to people who tinker with security happened later, but I don't think that use of the word should be regarded as definitive.

 

[skepticalbip]

But I thought the debunkers were the trolls, at least that's what the anti-vax/anti-gmo/truther/birther/chemtrail-HAARP/AGW-deniers call me when I refute them in order to collect my monthly shill payments.

Anyway, I disagree that the science deniers are "trolls". Trolls are Kevin Martin types that are trolling for LoLs and just being dicks for the fun of it; i.e. they don't believe their hype. The anti-science folks that are cherry picking their experts and distorting science to support their arguments are mostly true believers in some religion or another. They aren't trolling when they disagree. They really believe that the Seralini study conclusively proved that Roundup and Roundup-Ready corn meal causes cancer or that NEXRAD controls the weather or that contrails are a government spray program.

... the dumbing down of English.

"Trolling" now is defined as "doing something unwanted".

In other news...

"Literally" now means "Figuratively".. or "Greatly". Not "Precisely True"
"Ironic" now means "Coincidental". Not "The implied meaning is the opposite of the actual meaning"
"Hacking" means following more than one link from a Google search to reveal publicly disclosed information". Not "Gaining access to protected resources though weaknesses in security controls".

But whatever... Kids these days.. Can't live with them, can't kill them.

Not really a new thing.

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

― Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

I took that little exchange to be Carroll's sarcastic swipe at the common misuse of words in England at the time.

 

[Underseer]

... the dumbing down of English.

"Trolling" now is defined as "doing something unwanted".

In other news...

"Literally" now means "Figuratively".. or "Greatly". Not "Precisely True"
"Ironic" now means "Coincidental". Not "The implied meaning is the opposite of the actual meaning"
"Hacking" means following more than one link from a Google search to reveal publicly disclosed information". Not "Gaining access to protected resources though weaknesses in security controls".

But whatever... Kids these days.. Can't live with them, can't kill them.

Not really a new thing.

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

― Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

I took that little exchange to be Carroll's sarcastic swipe at the common misuse of words in England at the time.

How do you know he wasn't taking a swipe at the tendency of philosophers to randomly redefine what words mean for the purposes of a single debate?

I heard that a lot in that book was a swipe at various things going on in mathematics at the time. If he was taking such broad swipes at mathematicians, then why not philosophers as well?

 

[skepticalbip]

Not really a new thing.

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

― Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

I took that little exchange to be Carroll's sarcastic swipe at the common misuse of words in England at the time.

How do you know he wasn't taking a swipe at the tendency of philosophers to randomly redefine what words mean for the purposes of a single debate?

I heard that a lot in that book was a swipe at various things going on in mathematics at the time. If he was taking such broad swipes at mathematicians, then why not philosophers as well?

Wouldn't it be the same thing whether is was redefinition of words in common usage or a common practice of redefinition of words by philosophers? Both would seem to be a redefinition and misuse of words that was common in England at the time.

 

[Underseer]

Not really a new thing.

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

― Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass

I took that little exchange to be Carroll's sarcastic swipe at the common misuse of words in England at the time.

How do you know he wasn't taking a swipe at the tendency of philosophers to randomly redefine what words mean for the purposes of a single debate?

I heard that a lot in that book was a swipe at various things going on in mathematics at the time. If he was taking such broad swipes at mathematicians, then why not philosophers as well?

Wouldn't it be the same thing whether is was redefinition of words in common usage or a common practice of redefinition of words by philosophers? Both would seem to be a redefinition and misuse of words that was common in England at the time.

Language drift was probably understood in Carroll's time. Words changing definition over time through use is inherently different from people who know better arbitrarily assigning new definitions to words for a single debate.