# Why do some people argue a point without ANY basis to back it up?



## Ronni (May 7, 2020)

This is just a vent, so that I can prevent the top of my head from blowing off.

I do a lot of extensive Covid-19 research every day, because the picture is constantly changing and there is new or expanded information all the time.  I am subscribed to a number of credible news sources and surf the web for countless other bits and pieces of info to increase my understanding of the things I read.

I am NOT an expert, an MD, an infectious disease clinician or anything else.  I'm good at research, that's all.  I'm a research nerd and I tend to get aggressive about following down information to its source to either confirm or debunk.  I do this with pretty much everything, not just Covid-19. I don't act on a single report.  I gather multiple reports from credible sources before I determine to my satisfaction that the information is accurate. When I've determined that it is, I will sometimes share what I research citing source information, a link, the author, all of the that, whatever.

It irks me NO END when someone then comes at me and disagrees with me, without ONE piece of information to substantiate their claim. Or they make some comment like "they are deceiving us or staying at home is bs or people aren't dying like they said or how do you know? "(that's one of my faves lol) or any other comment that is not A. Researched similarly or B. Not responsive to what I posted.

I will happily engage in a conversation with people and exchange ideas and information. I don't have to be right because I don't have an ego so it doesn't make me feel less if I'm wrong, and in fact I am happy to have additional information to change my mind.  But DON'T come at me with these random, vapid, unfounded, un-researched ideas or opinions just because.  PROVE me wrong.  SHOW me.  Grant me the courtesy of providing the links, the research, with which I provided you.

And to answer the question of how do I know?  I just SHOWED you how I know, by giving the articles, the peer reviewed science, the research, the links.  I know as much as these articles have taught me, and that I've extrapolated from.  THAT'S how I know.

At least these under-informed naysayers can do the same for me.  Right???


----------



## Rosemarie (May 7, 2020)

Sadly, many people live in a world of their own making and believe what they want to believe. It's only when something affects them personally that they accept it.
I was married to a man like that. It was no good my telling him something, he had to find out for himself....by experience.


----------



## PopsnTuff (May 7, 2020)

I agree with Rosemarie.....and sadly, lots of folks put no stock in credible sites these days, not knowing if its truth or fiction....
I'm becoming one of em


----------



## Gaer (May 7, 2020)

Rosemarie said:


> Sadly, many people live in a world of their own making and believe what they want to believe. It's only when something affects them personally that they accept it.
> I was married to a man like that. It was no good my telling him something, he had to find out for himself....by experience.


What is it they say?
  " A man convinced against his will,
is of the same opinion still!"


----------



## Rosemarie (May 7, 2020)

Gaer said:


> What is it they say?
> " A man convinced against his will,
> is of the same opinion still!"


Not when he's just slipped and fallen on a slippery path, which I told him to avoid!!


----------



## Capt Lightning (May 8, 2020)

Yes, you have to be careful about what you read and often it's what the "powers that be"  want you to read and believe.

Some time ago, my daughter who is a senior lecturer and specialises in research methods and her boss, a respected professor, were asked to produce a research paper for the government of the day.  Having researched this meticulously and produced the report, they were told that they had come to the "wrong" conclusions.  They then approached the official opposition party who were not interested because (it looked like) they didn't want to "rock the boat".    I think that the government subsequently produced its own report which had the "correct" conclusions.   None of this surprises me.


----------



## Em in Ohio (May 8, 2020)

Ronni said:


> This is just a vent, so that I can prevent the top of my head from blowing off.
> 
> I do a lot of extensive Covid-19 research every day, because the picture is constantly changing and there is new or expanded information all the time.  I am subscribed to a number of credible news sources and surf the web for countless other bits and pieces of info to increase my understanding of the things I read.
> 
> ...


I totally agree and am delighted to see you address this issue!


----------



## CarolfromTX (May 8, 2020)

It's hard to know what to believe anymore. Even so-called experts have been caught in lies and with bad research. So just because it's in print, it may or may not be true. Or  only partly true. Lots of statistics these days are based on computer models, which, again, may be based on faulty information. And a lot of things are politically motivated. And if it wasn't politically motivated to begin with, it gets there real quick. In the current situation, I think there's all sorts of bad information out there. 

My personal belief is that "credible news source" is an oxymoron.


----------



## StarSong (May 8, 2020)

@Ronni, I am also a research nerd and provide links to data that backs up my positions, so I feel you on this.  Like you, I'm open to other perspectives that include source links.


----------



## Em in Ohio (May 8, 2020)

CarolfromTX said:


> It's hard to know what to believe anymore. Even so-called experts have been caught in lies and with bad research. So just because it's in print, it may or may not be true. Or  only partly true. Lots of statistics these days are based on computer models, which, again, may be based on faulty information. And a lot of things are politically motivated. And if it wasn't politically motivated to begin with, it gets there real quick. In the current situation, I think there's all sorts of bad information out there.
> 
> My personal belief is that "credible news source" is an oxymoron.


You have to read from multiple and diverse sources to form an educated opinion.


----------



## WhatInThe (May 8, 2020)

If they can't parrot what they read/heard they'll just say you are wrong. It's a reaction with more emotion than an argument. Alot of people like to pose as someone who follows the issues in detail. My favorites are those who brag about who their favorite talking head is yet they can't put those issues in their own words.


----------



## MarciKS (May 8, 2020)

None of us are experts. However we are entitled to our own opinions. But, I think arguing over it or stepping into a thread and calling BS is BS.


----------



## Liberty (May 8, 2020)

News channels don't even have to name their sources anymore.  Talk about "spinning" their own opinions.  Hub says "where have all  the good old reporters gone to...that's kind of like the song "where have all the flowers gone, long time passing".


----------



## rgp (May 8, 2020)

Liberty said:


> News channels don't even have to name their sources anymore.  Talk about "spinning" their own opinions.  Hub says "where have all  the good old reporters gone to...that's kind of like the song "where have all the flowers gone, long time passing".




  What we "see" today, are not reporters....they are news-readers. These "readers" get their news, when it is new off the wire [as they used to say] {today the internet/facebook/twitter}....etc. And then they re-word it in a manner they think we need to understand it......or in a manner that they think will best sell air-time. 

  IMO, today unbiased investigative reporters are a thing of the past. What we see is no longer a news broadcast...it is a show. For the past decade or two, it has been a show of "pretty" people. Today it is a show of diversity .

 The "news" is very likely more accurate when gleaned by social media [as much as I hate to admit it]...than when learned by main stream sources.


----------



## Ronni (May 8, 2020)

rgp said:


> The "news" is very likely more accurate when gleaned by social media [as much as I hate to admit it]...than when learned by main stream sources.



You're not wrong.

It's why I don't put credence in a single news source.  My "credible sources" consist of longtime mainstream news media rather than the fringe outlets, but even with that, I want MULTIPLE sources of whatever information I'm seeking from all those mainstream sources, and then I fact check those sources as best I can with other credible and well reviewed fact checking sites.

It's really bizarre to have gotten to that point.  To HAVE to do those steps before I'm relatively confident that my conclusions are as factual as they can be.


----------



## Buckeye (May 8, 2020)

I get all of my fact-based news from "The View".....


----------



## rgp (May 8, 2020)

Buckeye said:


> I get all of my fact-based news from "The View".....




  LOL!! I truly hope you re kidding............


----------



## Geezerette (May 8, 2020)

Going back to the time of Galileo and before I believe there has always been a certain small population in every generation with a hatred and fear of science of any kind. Some of might have had religious origins at the start, but as human knowledge of facts and workable theories has progressed in so many directions I believe that the science haters mostly lack the intelligence to understand the concepts and do not trust those who do. I say lacking intelligence rather than education because intelligent people without much formal education are able to grasp and apply the facts about how things work and think about how they might be improved. The explosion of media has brought the science haters into the light and to some degree allowed them to link up. The situation has been made worse by vocal ignorant individuals in the limelight who say the virus will go away and advise people to consume dangerous disinfectants. 
Ronni it’s a waste of your time to try to argue with the science haters. It’s very sad if they are people you have to deal with in your daily life. Ignore them and keep your distance. They and the conspiracy theorists are just trying to compensate for their feelings of utter powerlessness.


----------



## OneEyedDiva (May 8, 2020)

Some people are know it alls and they just have to be right all the time. It speaks to an insecurity IMO.  I like that you got this out of your system Ronni. You certainly are not wrong.


----------



## WhatInThe (May 8, 2020)

To go back to the OPs original thread title. Some people argue to win an argument no matter how they do it. I don't know wether it's about their competitiveness or power/ego. But it's not about the facts. It frequently seems those who argue the most are either deflecting, covering or seeking leverage which is frequently more than the appearance of being smarter.


----------



## Don M. (May 8, 2020)

In today's world, with the mainstream media all competing for advertising dollars, at one end, and clowns posting nonsense on Facebook and Twitter, on the other end, finding the Real story requires accessing multiple sources....for almost everything.  In the end, it all boils down to what an individual is willing to accept as the truth.


----------



## grahamg (May 8, 2020)

Ronni said:


> This is just a vent, so that I can prevent the top of my head from blowing off.
> 
> I do a lot of extensive Covid-19 research every day, because the picture is constantly changing and there is new or expanded information all the time.  I am subscribed to a number of credible news sources and surf the web for countless other bits and pieces of info to increase my understanding of the things I read.
> 
> ...



Here is a difficulty for you to consider(?).

Some " experts", virologists or epidemiologists are saying it is too soon to tell whether their advice will prove to be correct, or the best advice to give their government, (in Sweden for example). Therefore its just too soon to know okay, then why do you expect to overcome whatever you believe might be a worthwhile scientific argument, because you're a research nerd?

Why also should anyone think your weighing up of scientific arguments might prevail over theirs? The idea a virus such as this one could not be contained, was our UK government advisors opinion, when a pandemic scenario like the one we have now, was being considered in 2016.


----------



## Ronni (May 9, 2020)

grahamg said:


> Here is a difficulty for you to consider(?).
> 
> Some " experts", virologists or epidemiologists are saying it is too soon to tell whether their advice will prove to be correct, or the best advice to give their government, (in Sweden for example). Therefore its just too soon to know okay, then why do you expect to overcome whatever you believe might be a worthwhile scientific argument, because you're a research nerd?
> 
> Why also should anyone think your weighing up of scientific arguments might prevail over theirs? The idea a virus such as this one could not be contained, was our UK government advisors opinion, when a pandemic scenario like the one we have now, was being considered in 2016.



I fully recognize that right now a lot of information is changing and evolving as more research is done.  Don't wear masks/wear masks is one such evolution.  There are countless more.  I'm not talking about that. I thought I made that clear.  Sorry if it wasn't. 

I have NO problem being disagreed with, or being proven wrong or having a discussion about whatever I'm posting or opining about.  That isn't the problem.  The problem is that I present FACTS, as best I know them, as well researched as I can possibly manage.  I present science.  I present peer-reviewed articles, fact-checked information. I have ZERO desire to propagate mis-information, especially because doing so could be life-threatening to someone. 

What I DO have a problem with is someone countering that with a poorly researched opinion, or no research at all, just a statement that I'm wrong or that's not right or whatever.  Or even worse, countering with some fringe news outlet or conspiracy theory argument.  Say WHAT?????  

I gave you fact, science, and links to same.  At least do that for me.


----------



## Em in Ohio (May 9, 2020)

Ronni said:


> I fully recognize that right now a lot of information is changing and evolving as more research is done.  Don't wear masks/wear masks is one such evolution.  There are countless more.  I'm not talking about that. I thought I made that clear.  Sorry if it wasn't.
> 
> I have NO problem being disagreed with, or being proven wrong or having a discussion about whatever I'm posting or opining about.  That isn't the problem.  The problem is that I present FACTS, as best I know them, as well researched as I can possibly manage.  I present science.  I present peer-reviewed articles, fact-checked information. I have ZERO desire to propagate mis-information, especially because doing so could be life-threatening to someone.
> 
> ...


I appreciate your efforts!


----------



## Geezerette (May 9, 2020)

Ronni, people won’t follow your links to facts and science because they are scared of them, & realize that deep down they don’t have the intelligence to understand them . They are too fragile to feel that they might be wrong about anything, let alone let anyone else see it.


----------



## grahamg (May 9, 2020)

Here is a link to an as yet unpublished UK government report, or an article in a newspaper describing some of its supposed findings:

"The Government should publish the findings of a pandemic drill which forecast how the UK would be quickly overwhelmed by a major outbreak, Jeremy Hunt says today.

The comments will put pressure on ministers who have refused Freedom of Information requests from _The Telegraph _for the findings to be published to protect "information relating to the formulation and development of Government policy". _The Telegraph_ is appealing this decision.
The exercise is understood to have baked a 'herd immunity' strategy into Britain's official pandemic plans which assumed that a virus could not be contained.
In an interview for The Telegraph's Chopper's Politics podcast, which you can listen to on the player above, Mr Hunt who was Health secretary at the time of the Cygnus exercise said: "I don't have a problem with it being published...."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...-no-problem-governments-2016-pandemic-report/


----------



## Liberty (May 9, 2020)

Think some folks just argue because "their lips are moving"...they are probably attempting to get rid of energy, gain attention and need to seek an audience to do so. Got a tee shirt for that lack of isolation  disorder:


----------



## grahamg (May 10, 2020)

The argument being put forward this morning according to a BBC describing the actions of governments across the world, as they seek to relax shutdown regulations in order to permit more businesses to get back to work etc. was that the "RO number", was the thing everyone was trying to focus upon, (the RO number being a measure of how many people each person already infected with the virus passes it to on average).

It was stated over and over that these decisions, deciding which businesses or other organisation could reopen is " not a perfect science"(hence contains an element of guesswork).

The objective was stated as avoiding health services being overwhelmed by a second or subsequent peak of infection, and as far as I could assess, not the elimination of the virus altogether, (but I could be wrong on that one, you'll have to make your own mind up from however many sources of information you feel necessary and/or can trust).     .

Our UK government slogan has changed btw to: Stay alert, "Control the virus",  Save lives!     (Not "stay at home", as previously)


----------



## Ronni (May 10, 2020)

grahamg said:


> The argument being put forward this morning according to a BBC describing the actions of governments across the world, as they seek to relax shutdown regulations in order to permit more businesses to get back to work etc. was that the "RO number", was the thing everyone was trying to focus upon, (the RO number being a measure of how many people each person already infected with the virus passes it to on average).
> 
> It was stated over and over that these decisions, deciding which businesses or other organisation could reopen is " not a perfect science"(hence contains an element of guesswork).
> 
> ...


The US has a similar response in terms of mitigating the effects of the virus so that hospitals don't become overwhelmed, rather than the elimination of it all together.  

And no, the decisions facing our government about what to reopen and when to do that is a VERY imperfect science because we are currently ill-equipped to monitor the metrics required to make those decisions.  Limited testing kids to determine who is infected combined with not enough manpower (in spite of the millions unemployed!   ) or organization necessary to do the contact tracing that would determine who got infected by whom, means that information is limited.  Without the necessary metrics, the decisions about reopening the economy have an element of guesswork, even if it's educated guesswork.


----------



## StarSong (May 10, 2020)

Ronni said:


> The US has a similar response in terms of mitigating the effects of the virus so that hospitals don't become overwhelmed, rather than the elimination of it all together.
> 
> And no, the decisions facing our government about what to reopen and when to do that is a VERY imperfect science because we are currently ill-equipped to monitor the metrics required to make those decisions.  Limited testing kids to determine who is infected combined with not enough manpower (in spite of the millions unemployed!   ) or organization necessary to do the contact tracing that would determine who got infected by whom, means that information is limited.  Without the necessary metrics, the decisions about reopening the economy have an element of guesswork, even if it's educated guesswork.


I think many, including me, will continue to stay at home for the next several weeks to see how this spins out.  Italy, Spain, and several American states have offered themselves up as canaries in the coal mine.  Let's see how they're feeling by June 15.      

I've forgone a haircut this long, I can certainly manage for another month or two. Same with very close physical contact with my children (who are also wary of returning to a full range of previous activity).


----------

