re: #10 calochortus

I wrote this last night, and I think it’s important to point out how scientists tend to interact with each other. One of the biggest insults you can make is to insult the intelligence of your interlocutor. You can argue that a scientific idea is wrong or unfounded until you are blue in the face. Such things happen all the time - and people are usually able to distinguish between attacking an idea and attacking the man.

Even hinting that your interlocutor is unqualified or stupid is begging for a real fight. There is a huge unspoken etiquette about assuming your interlocutor is both bright and capable. Scientists rarely talk science with those who really want to “debate” them in the non technical world. They transfer those rules when they do.

Dr. Alley isn’t intimidated by the GOP moron at all. Alley however, like most scientists, falsely assumes that people who ask scientific questions want actual answers and will think through them without being spoonfed like they are children. Alley actually, in his mind, is trying to not be insulting by inferring that the congressman is a moron, by over explaining things which Alley would consider obvious.

Dr. Alley is making the false assumption that others are as smart and evidence/reason driven as he is. Most scientists do this. They are actually assuming, by their outlook, the best in others.

In the world of science, you don’t explain basics over and over, because to do so is to imply that your interlocutor is too dumb to follow. Its an insult.

In the world of politics, they bank on the listener being too dumb to think things through.

In the world at large, many are too dumb to follow.