When you are told to "trust the science" remember that the science told us that bread and pasta should be the #1 component of our diets. This was taught at schools for decades.

submitted by Chipit from derwi.tk

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

Science lied to us because they were bribed by the food industry. Duh.

Science can and will lie to us, up to and including causing mass deaths. How about the Tuskegee Experiment? The Stanford Prison Experiment? Piltdown Man? Cold Fusion? Theranos? The Lancet study on autism relationship to vaccines?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

Science is not a person.

People and corporations occasionally commit fraud with the help of misinformation and disinformation. Science is used to correct these people.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Obviously you've never met Johnny Science.

These aren't fringe beliefs though, there really was... is something afoul with nutritional science for a long time although it is a very difficult field to study. It wasn't an honest mistake carbs were pumped as healthy, as it's not an honest mistake veganism is sold as a more healthy alternative.

[–]thefirststone 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I knew Mr. Wizard. And Johnny Science is, sir, no Mr. Wizard.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes - I think this is a very important topic of discussion. No - I'm afraid I've not had the pleasure of meeting Johnny Science.

[–]Chipit[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

The scientists, who are people, commit fraud. Sometimes this fraud harms a huge number of people.

We will end up discarding decades of scientific research because it's not replicable. It's called the "Replication Crisis". The thousands of people who committed this fraud are all scientists who were practicing science.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

A 2016 poll of 1,500 scientists conducted by Nature reported that 70% of them had failed to reproduce at least one other scientist's experiment (including 87% of chemists, 77% of biologists, 69% of physicists and engineers, 67% of medical researchers, 64% of earth and environmental scientists, and 62% of all others)

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Again - here's the implication that science and scientists are generally fraudsters. OK, from now on, I'll only believe what you tell me.

[–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

The science says that 67% of medical researchers have failed to reproduce an experiment. Would you trust people like that? Do they deserve your trust?

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

That happens with cutting edge science. The initial findings are interesting because they stand out. Often in the first paper they're misinterpreted, or not completely understood.

That's why science only becomes settled after replication and preferably development of the underlying theory.

[–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

But the "science" can't be replicated. We're not talking a few papers, we're talking 67-87%. And these are legitimate "scientists" doing this. We are in a Dark Age.

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

The scientific community is aware of the replication issue. Established science is established by replication and reproduction. Cutting edge science is speculative and most often refuted in part or entirely over the next few years.

Fraud is a different problem. But fraudulent work can't be replicated or reproduced either.

[–]Chipit[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

If a study cannot be replicated, then it is not science.

Why are you defending these malicious actors?　

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

If a study cannot be replicated, then it is not science.

Science advances by many misunderstandings. The thing that makes it science is that those are investigated and corrected.

Why are you defending these malicious actors?　

Malicious?

Newtonian mechanics isn't accurate. It doesn't correctly predict the advance in the orbit of mercury, and fails to predict relativistic effects such as time dilation and Fitzgerald contraction.

Is your position that Newton was malicious?

Because that's simply not the case. We know more about mechanics now, but that doesn't make previous investigations malicious.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Really? 1500 scientists - on a topic that they normally don't work with - eg. replicating the exact complicated experiments of others, which is impossible in most cases - though in any event they're working on their own highly specialized research. Good thing there are 9 million scientists in the world who can help corroborate - though their own versions of experiments - the value of any specific scientific discovery. If we're going to be skeptical of the information we read about, science can help. [Edit - removed the last sentence.]