{"id":24346,"date":"2024-11-29T11:43:34","date_gmt":"2024-11-29T09:43:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/?p=24346"},"modified":"2024-11-29T11:43:34","modified_gmt":"2024-11-29T09:43:34","slug":"brandolinis-law-again","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/sciencesurf\/2024\/11\/brandolinis-law-again\/","title":{"rendered":"Brandolinis Law Again"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>&#8220;The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it (<a href=\"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/sciencesurf\/2022\/02\/brandolinis-principle\/\">source<\/a>)&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>It is timely to quote now the 2016 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nature.com\/articles\/540171a\">Nature letter<\/a> of Phil Williamson<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>With the election of Donald Trump, his appointment of advisers who are on record as dismissing scientific evidence, and the emboldening of deniers on everything from climate change to vaccinations, the amount of nonsense written about science on the Internet (and elsewhere) seems set to rise. So what are we, as scientists, to do?<\/p>\n<p>Most researchers who have tried to engage online with ill-informed journalists or pseudoscientists will be familiar with Brandolini\u2019s law (also known as the Bullshit Asymmetry Principle): the amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it. Is it really worth taking the time and effort to challenge, correct and clarify articles that claim to be about science but in most cases seem to represent a political ideology?<\/p>\n<p>I think it is.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<div class=\"bottom-note\">\n  <span class=\"mod1\">CC-BY-NC Science Surf , accessed 07.04.2026<\/span>\n <\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>&#8220;The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than that needed to produce it (source)&#8221; It is timely to quote now the 2016 Nature letter of Phil Williamson With the election of Donald Trump, his appointment of advisers who are on record as dismissing scientific evidence, and the emboldening &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/sciencesurf\/2024\/11\/brandolinis-law-again\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Brandolinis Law Again<\/span> <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24346","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-note-worthy"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24346","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24346"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24346\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24354,"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24346\/revisions\/24354"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24346"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24346"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.wjst.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24346"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}