/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8179419
Statistically, no matter how smart you are, there are hundreds or thousands of people who are smarter than you. You're outnumbered.
>>8179422
>where's the science
I assume the people who study science for a living have more of it than you. I could go google it and get charts or something, but you wouldn't believe it anyway, so what's the point?
>appeal to authority
I fucking hate when people copy/paste a fallacy and assume it applies and assume that makes a good argument. This is neither an appeal to authority or an appeal to populism nor a slipper slope or ad hominem or whatever else you want to throw at me. Its common sense and sound reasoning. Let's walk through this
>I do not know everything
>It is impossible to know everything
>I trust experts in their given fields to know relevant information
>Example: I trust airplane engineers to build airplanes, because I've ridden airplanes before and not died. I trust physicists to do physics right, even if theoretical, because 70 years ago theoretical physics gave us the atomic bomb. I trust computer scientists to make computers, because I'm on a computer right now. I usually trust doctors because they have helped me in the past and usually know enough not to kill people.
The list goes on
>Given that I trust experts in their given fields, because in our modern world it is silly and impossible to do so, I choose to trust that nearly every meteorologist, climatologist, geologist, etc etc aren't all simultaneously wrong on such a massive scale that it would imply that the entirety of earth and environmental science is entirely wrong.
>mfw you sit in an air-conditioned house, each component of which was designed by experts, typing on your computer designed by experts, in a world in which every single technological component is designed by experts in their field, to say "I think 99% of experts are completely wrong, and I am right because
>I have yet to see convincing scientific evidence"