‘Experts’ Know Less than They Think; All ‘authorities’ should be challenged.
POSTED BY: 6ixStringJack
UPDATED: Friday, March 20, 2026 02:22
VIEWED: 445
PAGE 1 of 1
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/03/experts_know_less_tha
n_they_think.html
Quote:
Occasionally I hear credentialed professionals with prestigious titles whine about the so-called “war on expertise.” It really bothers people who see themselves as “experts” that a growing share of society ignores them. A psychologist might intuit something revealing from the lack of self-confidence plaguing our “expert” class. If all the fancy degrees, voluminous curricula vitae, and lofty career positions have failed to instill a resilient modicum of self-esteem, then perhaps all those things are not the true measures of a person’s worth.
“Experts” do not like to be challenged. They say things such as, “I have a PhD in this,” or, “I get paid a lot of money to talk about that,” and expect everybody listening to stop thinking and immediately agree with everything the “expert” has to say. I once witnessed a young “race studies” professor intrude into an online debate and tell everyone that she was correct and everybody else was wrong. Her evidence? She cited the costs of her education, her recent promotion, and her new annual salary. Traditionally, that’s considered a specific kind of logical fallacy known as an appeal to authority. When appeals to “expertise” replace reason and rationality, false conclusions are more easily justified.
We have been living in an era rife with appeals to authority masquerading as truth. In fact, I came across something hilariously unsurprising as I was writing this essay. Because Internet search engines no longer operate as research tools but rather as propaganda aggregators, I often have to peruse many pages of search results before I find topical and pertinent sources. Leftwing disinformation index Wikipedia routinely receives prime placement for any online query. I decided to check how the propagandists at Wikipedia describe appeals to authority these days, and the editors did not disappoint (someone as cynical as I):
“While all sources agree this is not a valid form of logical proof, and therefore, obtaining knowledge in this way is fallible, there is disagreement on the general extent to which it is fallible — historically, opinion on the appeal to authority has been divided: it is listed as a non-fallacious argument as often as a fallacious argument in various sources.” My sides, they hurt so much as I laugh uncontrollably! Then Wikipedia’s meaningless equivocation ends with this gem: “Some consider it a practical and sound way of obtaining knowledge that is generally likely to be correct when the authority is real.”
There you go, kids! So long as the “authority” is “real,” it’s quite “practical” and “sound” to hand your brain over to the resident “expert” or AI machine and let he/she/it do your thinking for you! It’s not a “logical fallacy” if the “authority” says it’s not! How very twenty-first-century of the 1984-like censors, history rewriters, and information warfare specialists who manage the world’s “free” encyclopedia. Wikipedia may be “free,” but it still levies a steep tax. The “price” of offshoring one’s thinking to “experts” is a life filled with few cogent thoughts. That’s too high of a cost for any human seeking wisdom.
Appeals to authority are often absurd. Since the mid-twentieth-century, most of the handsome or beautiful news anchors who tell the world what to believe have been empty-headed script-readers with subpar intellects (Hello, Dan Rather!). According to renowned climate scientist Al Gore, Miami and Manhattan should have spent the last decade submerged under ten feet of water. At the 2018 United Nations Climate Change Conference, then-fifteen-year-old Swede Greta Thunberg told world leaders that they were “not mature enough to tell it like it is.” Those world leaders — prone to lean directly into appeals to authority themselves — immediately told the planet’s youngest generations to listen to the Swedish teenager if they wanted to survive the carbon apocalypse. Similarly, noted virologist Bill Gates (I forget: Does heNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This is a simple minded argument for oppositional people.
There ARE actual experts. We can judge their expertise ... the depth of their understanding and ability to think ... by their ability to accomplish, or at least their ability to predict.
Expert woodworkers create masterpieces. Expert doctors diagnose and treat diseases that stump less expert practitioners. Military planners devise winning strategies. Programmers who debug complex code. There are probably even expert economists who accurately predict policy outcomes (altho I haven't seen any yet!).
Fauci IS an expert in virology. He was expert enough to direct research that turned a relatively benign virus into pandemic- causing killer. The problem with Fauci isn't that he's inexpert, the problem is he's a LIAR. The problem with pharma isn't that they're inexpert, the problem is that sick people are their RESOURCE.
But conflating expertise with self-interested charlatanism and then tossing it out is for oppositional people with inferiority complexes.
Evaluate concepts as they come to you. Do they work in the real world? If they do, it's a concept worth using until something better comes along. Become expert yourself.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal."- Henry Kissinger
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You must have gotten hung up on the first paragraph or two and you either didn't read the rest or you just skimmed it and didn't understand the rest of the article because you'd already judged it.
He (or she) covered all of those bases. There are many, many, many reasons not to trust the "experts".
There aren't too many reasons why you should trust them.
--------------------------------------------------
Be Nice. Don't be a dick. 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I read the whole thing thru, SIX. And my reply is still valid.
The "experts" who pushed wind and solar as the ONLY sustainable power sources are like SECOND: Self- serving charlatans.
But there are "experts" and there are real, actual experts. And rejecting even the IDEA of expertise bc it's mixed in with lies and delusions is like saying knowledge doesn't exist.
The trick is figuring out who the real experts are.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal."- Henry Kissinger
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Why do Trump followers despise experts?
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The "experts" who pushed wind and solar as the ONLY sustainable power sources are like SECOND: Self- serving charlatans.
Trump followers often distrust experts because they view them as part of a corrupt, condescending “establishment" or "elite" that looks down on them, favoring Donald Trump's direct, anti-intellectual populism. They prefer his "us vs. them" rhetoric, which validates their concerns, ignores traditional scientific consensus, and challenges institutional authority, viewing it as strong leadership.
Key reasons for this distrust include:
• Cultural Resentment & Anti-Elitism: Many followers believe experts are "snobs" who do not share their values and, along with mainstream media, hold them in disdain.
• Political Loyalty & “Us vs. Them": Trump's political style encourages followers to dismiss expert findings—particularly in science, health, and politics—as fabricated attempts to undermine him.
• Populist Identity: The MAGA movement values loyalty, intuition, and direct connection with Trump over academic or professional credentials.
• Empowerment: Disdaining expert knowledge empowers supporters, allowing them to rely on their own perceptions and the leader's narrative.
This trend is often linked to high levels of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO), where supporters are more likely to submit to a central authority figure rather than established institutional or scientific consensus.
Key reasons for this skepticism include:
• Perceived Cultural Condescension: Many supporters, particularly those without college degrees, believe experts and intellectuals "look down on them" and demean their values.
• Populist Resentment: There is a deep-seated belief that elite experts in science, policy, and media support a "shallow, fashionable consensus" rather than objective truth, failing to solve national problems.
• Opposition to the System: Donald Trump's rhetoric frames expert consensus as a barrier to American success, encouraging followers to trust his perspective over established figures.
• Anti-Science and Policy Impact: The rejection of scientific expertise (e.g., COVID-19 mitigation or climate science) is often aligned with political goals to avoid negative economic impacts or government oversight.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Why are angry poor white trash angry, poor, and trashy?
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Be Evil. Be a dick.
In summary, the group in question is often the product of structural economic decline (poor), experiencing profound loss of status and economic frustration (angry), and subject to a historical, class-based stigma that equates poverty with lack of moral character ("trashy").
The socioeconomic, historical, and psychological factors behind the stereotype often referred to as "angry, poor, white trash" are complex, involving deep-seated class structures, generational poverty, and intense frustration over declining social standing.
Based on analysis, here is why this group is often described as poor, angry, and "trashy":
1. Why They Are Poor (Structural and Economic Factors)
• Deindustrialization and Wage Stagnation: Many in this demographic are part of the "white working class" that has been severely affected by the decline of manufacturing jobs, the rise of NAFTA, and a shift away from well-paying jobs that did not require a college education.
• Generational Poverty and Rural Decline: Poverty in these communities is often deeply entrenched, particularly in regions like Appalachia, where there is a lack of diverse economic opportunity, limited access to quality education, and heavy dependence on unstable, low-wage industries.
• The "Culture of Poverty" Theory: This theory suggests that constant financial hardship causes people to focus only on current survival, creating attitudes of helplessness that can perpetuate the cycle of poverty.
2. Why They Are Angry (Sociological and Psychological Factors)
• "Last Place" Anxiety: Research indicates that white Americans who perceive themselves to be losing social status compared to other groups—falling behind both wealthy elites and people of color—are more likely to feel angry, frustrated, and support extremist ideologies.
• Loss of Stability: The loss of secure jobs, union communities, and traditional class identity has left many feeling abandoned and isolated, replaced by a "lonely poverty".
• System-Directed Frustration: Individuals with lower social status often experience greater frustration due to life adversities and blocked goals, which is frequently vented as anger.
• Economic Insecurity and Scapegoating: High levels of economic insecurity are often associated with higher levels of racial resentment, with anger directed toward minorities or immigrants who are blamed for taking jobs, even when that is not the cause of their poverty.
3. Why They Are Labeled "Trashy" (Stigma and Class Distinctions)
• Historical Class Conflict: The term "white trash" dates back to the 1820s and was created as a derogatory label by wealthier individuals to distinguish themselves from poor whites.
• Violation of Social Norms: The term is used to describe white people who do not conform to established behavioral social, and aesthetic expectations of "proper" whiteness. It implies a, low standard of living, poor, or uneducated.
• "Not Quite White": Sociologist Matt Wray argues that the term is used to describe white people who, through their behavior or poverty, seem to threaten the social order, making them targets for contempt and disgust.
• Stereotype as Control: The term is often used to silence poor whites who try to speak out, framing their complaints as illegitimate.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I read the whole thing thru, SIX. And my reply is still valid.
The "experts" who pushed wind and solar as the ONLY sustainable power sources are like SECOND: Self- serving charlatans.
But there are "experts" and there are real, actual experts. And rejecting even the IDEA of expertise bc it's mixed in with lies and delusions is like saying knowledge doesn't exist.
The trick is figuring out who the real experts are.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal."- Henry Kissinger
I understand, and I agree.
The title of the article is that "all 'authorities' should be challenged".
It wasn't "all 'authorities' should be ignored outright".
People like Ted and Second LOVE the idea of authorities, because it allows them to put their brains in permanent auto-pilot mode, and allows them to think that everything they do or say is right because they willingly go along with everything they're told because they traded in their critical thinking and free will.
--------------------------------------------------
Be Nice. Don't be a dick.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:6ix, you do love to pat yourself on the back, but looking at your actual history reveals that you live in failure, which happens a lot to angry poor white trash.
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
People like Ted and Second LOVE the idea of authorities, because it allows them to put their brains in permanent auto-pilot mode, and allows them to think that everything they do or say is right because they willingly go along with everything they're told because they traded in their critical thinking and free will.
--------------------------------------------------
Be Evil. Be a dick.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Authority Ilan Goldenberg spent years gaming a conflict with Iran. Here are 5 lessons he learned that Trump hasn't.
Mar 18, 2026
Earlier this week, Donald Trump was asked whether he was surprised that no one briefed him in advance that Iran might respond to an American attack by targeting Gulf countries. His response? “Nobody. Nobody. No no no.”
That is evidence that either Trump is lying or his administration has so cut itself off from experts that no one briefed him on what was essentially common wisdom among US experts – that major strikes on Iran could prompt Tehran to respond by targeting oil infrastructure and US bases across the Middle East and closing the Strait of Hormuz.
For the past 15 years, I’ve participated in and helped run scenario exercises and war games on Iran both at the Pentagon and then outside of government. These exercises are not about predicting the future with certainty. They are about understanding the possible consequences of choices.
And on Iran, the lessons from these exercises were remarkably consistent and quite similar to what we’ve seen play out over the past two weeks. Here are five things Trump should have known and would have known if his administration had listened to experts:
1. When the regime feels existentially threatened, Iran will escalate
In most war games, conflicts began at a lower level: an Israeli strike, a proxy attack, a miscalculation. At that stage, Iran usually calibrated its response. It retaliated, but tried to avoid drawing the United States fully into the conflict because it knew that a full-on war with the US represented a massive threat. That pattern held in real life during the Israel-Iran exchanges of 2024 and 2025.
But once the United States entered directly, and once the regime believed its survival was at stake, those restraints would disappear.
At that point, Iran’s playbook was well understood: strike US bases, harass shipping in the Gulf, activate proxy forces across the region, and target oil infrastructure and civilian assets. The goal was to impose costs, spike oil prices, and create international pressure on Washington to stop.
This was not hard to foresee. It was one of the most consistent conclusions in the exercises I saw. What we are watching now was entirely predictable.
2. It is easy to close the Strait of Hormuz. It is hard to reopen it
https://zeteo.com/p/i-wargamed-iran-for-obama-this-is
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Why do Trump followers despise experts?
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The "experts" who pushed wind and solar as the ONLY sustainable power sources are like SECOND: Self- serving charlatans.
Trump followers often distrust experts because they view them as part of a corrupt, condescending “establishment" or "elite" that looks down on them, favoring Donald Trump's direct, anti-intellectual populism. They prefer his "us vs. them" rhetoric, which validates their concerns, ignores traditional scientific consensus, and challenges institutional authority, viewing it as strong leadership.
SECOND, with every post you reveal yourself as a non-expert who is part of a corrupt system and who lords it over everyone else.
That's why nobody listens to you.
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal."- Henry Kissinger
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME