@Sage862@OxfordOutlaws@nntaleb Lots of diseases can’t be diagnosed by nurses. But I agree that real world experience is more important generally. I’m a scientist, I’m around scientists with decades of experience and they make the kinds of errors I’m talking about. People love their hypothesises even when wrong
@a58558192@nntaleb Also look at how much lower the death rates are compared to the infection rates in vaccinated populations, looks like it’s working fairly well. And yeah if you adjust for everything it’s still much lower. Surely at some point they have to admit they are wrong?
@OxfordOutlaws@nntaleb Lots of the errors in their arguments are mathematical, so @nntaleb is if anything more qualified. Most of this stuff is trying to decipher signal from noise. I became a bioinformatician because I realised my bioscience degrees didn’t make me qualified to understand this stuff.
@nntaleb There are a lot of grey areas in biology and disagreements in these areas are fine. Weinstein’s arguments aren’t in the grey area, they are often just wrong. For example he doesn’t understand conditional probabilities.
@ScienceMagazine@bp22 Ha it’s weird when my work stuff and poker Twitter come together. (I didn’t write the paper, I just work on these kind of things)
@Physical_Prep I’m neuroscientist but yes learning R (and coding I general) was the best thing I’ve ever done. Things that would be impossible before knowing R are now trivial.
@calebmeredth Ever since I found out about stochastic processes and diffusion mechanics it’s completely changed how I view biology (and everything actually). I’m slowly catching up on the math/technical side. I’ll get there.
@calebmeredth Totally agree and super interesting. My skew is from the developmental/ regenerative neuroscience point of view. Which involves tons of diffusion of morphogens. However particularly, I’m interested in how these scale with increasing size domains. Not enough work is done on this.