Anyone who refers to "science!" as a monolith instead of a process is a fetishist. They worship a vague concept of "science!" without understanding what it truly is.
Oh, and while we're at it, reproducibility crisis. So this "science!" is not only a false god, it's a false god that can't deliver.
Where i live those signs are everywhere, they have the whole list of slogans and it is pure orwellian brain aids.
There was a time when scientific consensus was that the earth was the center of the universe, was that science real too? Witches float because they are made of wood, therefore they must be burned?
Actually I guess with the modern theory of expansion of the universe, everywhere is the center.. so jokes on me.
Another one I like is "until there is justice everywhere there can be no justice anywhere". That is just fucking stupid. In what universe would there ever be no injustice? And until then we're just going to burn shit down? Obviously incremental progress toward a more just society is the only thing remotely possible.
We can laugh at these signs but the problem is they are weaponized brain aids which will seep into the brains of retards and they will seriously believe it. And then they burn our society to the ground.
There's another one. A contradiction in terms, "scientific consensus". Mob rule posing as truth.
If you understand science, then you know that something is either true, or it's not. It's just a matter of figuring it out and proving it, or abandoning the idea for lack of proof. If you can prove it then there is no need for a so called "consensus", because the truth of your idea is observable.
When you try to claim a "consensus", you're admitting that you can't actually prove the thing you're claiming, but you want to shout down disagreement with weight of numbers.
Well the whole point is that if it's reproducible you don't need a consensus. The only kind of idea that needs to shout down disagreement is an idea that in intrinsically false.
The most succinct description of the sad state of non-reproducible, politically involved "science" is this transcript of a lecture by Michael Crichton:
He shows how the science mainstream was lured away from focusing on actual reproducible science and onto "sciencey" theories and models that were driven by and marketed to drive political ends.
This bullshit seems to have totally captured the scientific community, even people who really should know better seem to have just drunk the koolaid. "it's not my field, so i just have to trust those guys to have done their due diligence"
Or, "i guess it's for a good cause, so speak no evil of science"
Or, "i shouldn't speak ill of that guy or someone might look at the efficacy of my funding"
The trouble is that academics in science and to a lesser extent engineering tend to be left-leaning. Many of the organizations they belong to are also very left-leaning. So as a scientist in such an organization, it can be difficult to push back on politicized, left-supporting fake science without jeopardizing your position.
The other problem is that to the extent they are left leaning, they tend to give a pass along the lines of the ends justify the means. Global warming may be bullshit science but well, maybe burning fossil fuels is bad for the environment anyway.. so they rationalize not questioning the fake science.
I've also personally experienced a lot of questionable integrity in science, or perhaps "science", where spin is far too big a factor in getting work funded and published. The peer review process is also totally inundated with complete garbage work flooding in from largely Chinese universities. Not all garbage of course but the sheer number of students trying to publish is huge and the quality is generally extremely poor.
I think there's generally a failure to maintain principles in the scientific community and it's pretty pervasive. It very much parallels the failure of principle in leftism in general vs. conservatives.
Anyone who refers to "science!" as a monolith instead of a process is a fetishist. They worship a vague concept of "science!" without understanding what it truly is.
Oh, and while we're at it, reproducibility crisis. So this "science!" is not only a false god, it's a false god that can't deliver.
^^^^THIS PEDE GETS IT!^^^^^
Where i live those signs are everywhere, they have the whole list of slogans and it is pure orwellian brain aids.
There was a time when scientific consensus was that the earth was the center of the universe, was that science real too? Witches float because they are made of wood, therefore they must be burned?
Actually I guess with the modern theory of expansion of the universe, everywhere is the center.. so jokes on me.
Another one I like is "until there is justice everywhere there can be no justice anywhere". That is just fucking stupid. In what universe would there ever be no injustice? And until then we're just going to burn shit down? Obviously incremental progress toward a more just society is the only thing remotely possible.
We can laugh at these signs but the problem is they are weaponized brain aids which will seep into the brains of retards and they will seriously believe it. And then they burn our society to the ground.
There's another one. A contradiction in terms, "scientific consensus". Mob rule posing as truth.
If you understand science, then you know that something is either true, or it's not. It's just a matter of figuring it out and proving it, or abandoning the idea for lack of proof. If you can prove it then there is no need for a so called "consensus", because the truth of your idea is observable.
When you try to claim a "consensus", you're admitting that you can't actually prove the thing you're claiming, but you want to shout down disagreement with weight of numbers.
^^this
consensus is OK if it's also reproducible
Well the whole point is that if it's reproducible you don't need a consensus. The only kind of idea that needs to shout down disagreement is an idea that in intrinsically false.
So, Chicken Little, Henny Penny.... all go into Foxy Loxy's den.
Our oldest folk tales warn of the danger of following the consensus.
"But that sounds like work"
~Millennials
Science is their savior. A bad one.
The most succinct description of the sad state of non-reproducible, politically involved "science" is this transcript of a lecture by Michael Crichton:
http://www.s8int.com/crichton.html
He shows how the science mainstream was lured away from focusing on actual reproducible science and onto "sciencey" theories and models that were driven by and marketed to drive political ends.
This bullshit seems to have totally captured the scientific community, even people who really should know better seem to have just drunk the koolaid. "it's not my field, so i just have to trust those guys to have done their due diligence"
Or, "i guess it's for a good cause, so speak no evil of science"
Or, "i shouldn't speak ill of that guy or someone might look at the efficacy of my funding"
The trouble is that academics in science and to a lesser extent engineering tend to be left-leaning. Many of the organizations they belong to are also very left-leaning. So as a scientist in such an organization, it can be difficult to push back on politicized, left-supporting fake science without jeopardizing your position.
The other problem is that to the extent they are left leaning, they tend to give a pass along the lines of the ends justify the means. Global warming may be bullshit science but well, maybe burning fossil fuels is bad for the environment anyway.. so they rationalize not questioning the fake science.
I've also personally experienced a lot of questionable integrity in science, or perhaps "science", where spin is far too big a factor in getting work funded and published. The peer review process is also totally inundated with complete garbage work flooding in from largely Chinese universities. Not all garbage of course but the sheer number of students trying to publish is huge and the quality is generally extremely poor.
I think there's generally a failure to maintain principles in the scientific community and it's pretty pervasive. It very much parallels the failure of principle in leftism in general vs. conservatives.