1/ I find it interesting that people hold up a single scientist (expert?) who is in opposition to widely held scientific consensus and defend them to the hilt because of their profession, but when confronted with evidence of first hand accounts dismiss them.

2/ So we find this sort of thing all over the place and it currently plays out on Covid, with deniers sighting Yeadon, but when one points out that he doesn’t have any support in the scientific community for his specific position that is dismissed as unimportant.

3/ When you might go on to question if someone who hasn’t published since 2013, and though undoubtedly a respiratory expert, isn’t an expert on viral respiratory disease or virology or communicable diseases is really the best person they can hold up as an expert it is dismissed.

4/ So when they present a single data point you ask if they will accept single data points like testimony (admittedly on Twitter) from hospital doctors about the severity of this disease and how quick the build in ITU wards is, it is again dismissed.

5/ We have a pattern here it seems, because this happened on Brexit as well. We saw an expert, Minford, held up to make the argument. At the same time the Brexiter would cling to an idea that the car industry would do well, which entirely contradicted testimony Minford gave.

6/ When presented with arguments from van drivers or small importers about how much damage it would do, this was again hand waved away as single data points and unimportant.

I start to spot a pattern.

7/ It has something to do with finding something that suits what fits your personal world view, not letting contradictory information puncture that view, and ensures that logical contradiction is dismissed.

8/ Professionally I have seen this in risk management that has led to deadly complacency. It is usually from people just smart enough to understand the numbers don’t point to what they are doing but they can manipulate themselves into believing their own view instead of the data

9/ Why does it matter? We seem to be getting stuck with people making increasing numbers of poor decisions or more obviously poor decisions and it is costing lives, businesses and money. What can we do about it? It starts with people and how they learn to think.

10/ Challenging the lack of logic in decision making and getting people to challenge themselves when they make statements as to whether those are true or just being made to benefit themselves or their long held views would go a long way and would need to start in school.

11/ If we wait until adulthood those patterns are so engrained it will be too late.

End.