1/ On Twitter Sociology, Part 2
I've used Twitter extensively only during the pandemic. Most interactions are useful, including open discussions w/ other scientists & professionals, and lots of Q&A with the public.
I've used Twitter extensively only during the pandemic. Most interactions are useful, including open discussions w/ other scientists & professionals, and lots of Q&A with the public.
2/ Then there are the trolls and perhaps bots. More common in Spain's twitter than in other spaces (not sure why).
I hesitated at first, but now when it is clear that they are not listening but just trying to stir idle discussion, I just block them.
I hesitated at first, but now when it is clear that they are not listening but just trying to stir idle discussion, I just block them.
3/ I don't block ppl (general public or especially scientists) that disagree with me, but that do so thoughtfully and respectfully. In fact I've learned the most from that kind of ppl.
We scientists know that ppl disagreeing with you is normal, and that's often how we learn.
We scientists know that ppl disagreeing with you is normal, and that's often how we learn.
4/ Most scientists have been great.
There are a few that have behaved strangely. Can discuss an argument fine. But when they lose the argument, rather than admitting it, they claim it is a personal attack from us.
I discussed that in this thread:
There are a few that have behaved strangely. Can discuss an argument fine. But when they lose the argument, rather than admitting it, they claim it is a personal attack from us.
I discussed that in this thread:
https://twitter.com/jljcolorado/status/1357737374621515776
5/ Before the pandemic I didn't know what "gaslighting" meant. I had to look it up: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighti…
[Seguidores en español: como se dice "gaslighting"?]
[Seguidores en español: como se dice "gaslighting"?]
6/ With time I realized that aerosol scientists, including myself, have been gaslit in an industrial scale over the last year.
Some other scientists implied that they knew stuff we didn't, and we didn't know what we were talking about. Except they never explained it clearly.
Some other scientists implied that they knew stuff we didn't, and we didn't know what we were talking about. Except they never explained it clearly.
7/ This gaslighting played out most strongly with the choir case that we investigated and published (doi.org/10.1111/ina.12…), and which IMHO was the clearest and most undeniable case of airborne spread of the early pandemic.
8/ Somehow that case seemed especially threatening to some scientists that were (for reasons I don't fully understand) hell-bent to deny that SARS-CoV-2 is dominantly airborne.
So they tried to mud the waters at every opportunity.
So they tried to mud the waters at every opportunity.
9/ The curious thing is that some of the gaslighters in chief, are now saying that *they* have been gaslit but us, and playing the victim, all over again...
I have no words or energy for this.
I have no words or energy for this.
10/ I've blocked a couple of ppl bc I don't see anything useful that can arise of those interactions.
Any attempt at discussion, now that it is obvious COVID is dominantly airborne, they claim it is an attack, and they try to turn ppl against us:
Any attempt at discussion, now that it is obvious COVID is dominantly airborne, they claim it is an attack, and they try to turn ppl against us:
https://twitter.com/jljcolorado/status/1357741985302519812
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
