= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
PeterS comments on The Correct Contrarian Cluster - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (228)
Can I ask for your sources or reasoning as to why "WTC explosives: no" is a slam-dunk?
Eliezer has implied in the past that he trusts "domain experts" implicitly. My guess would be that "WTC explosives: no" is a slam-dunk because there is a consensus on the topic among all the qualified engineers (to my knowledge).
Or else he's part of the conspiracy.