iownanamericanshorthair
82840
1476
134
Apr 16, 2017 4:39 PM
iownanamericanshorthair
82840
1476
134
JELLYCRUSHER
Prove it.
henrysnugglemonster
TheAsterite
take pharmaceutical trial based "science" with a grain of salt tho
lordsmolder
vladimusvonhackenslash
Doing experiments over and over again doesn't hurt. Helps you find more funky shit.
ClassicSean
We get it, you science ffs
Renowned1k90
Tell that to NK.
nafun
the problem is that people feel the exact same way about religion.
Wikitaytay
Actually, truthfully, science is never true, it is just extremely difficult or near impossible to prove wrong.
Sheprador
Just because science works whether they believe it, doesn't mean they can't deny it and legislate against all common sense.
WeirdScientist
Approved
DancingJuice
Homeboy takes money from the Koch Brothers...you know, for science research.
Refridgerate
"Truth" is a kinda weird word to use here. Laws of physics and scientific phenomena occur whether we believe it or not, yes, but 1/2
Refridgerate
Because of how the scientific method is, a theory can never be "proven". So I get what he's trying to say, but it's worded a little weird
rylecx
Yeah but data can also be tortured to tell you just about whatever the experimenter wants. You have to read the details and no one does
WhileMyWeepGentlyGuitars
Theres still a way to be productively skeptical about things. Thats not a justification for people of the anti-vaxxer, etc. sort (1/?),
WhileMyWeepGentlyGuitars
Rather, that flatly believing everything from a scientific study, without demanding a certain rigor in proof, should also be discouraged (2/
WhileMyWeepGentlyGuitars
Its good to agree with the notions of science, but its better to always demand a higher standard for it when reasonable and possible.
Augies
I still dont understand how anybody can believe in religion
[deleted]
[deleted]
Aussieausti
People have faith in a religion for a multitude of reasons you may be to ignorant to understand
Augies
You can still understand a reason, but still ask why. If you look at the color red and go..its blue..and I go..ehm nah..Thats not ignorant
jonnnney
I'm not following you on facebook get rid of the goddamn banner.
poorwhitetrash
My opinion of that man has drastically changed since he got a twitter account...
DarthKratos
I believe he is more entitled to have an opinion than most.
causality
Good. Your reaction to statements should be on their own merits, not on your opinion of their speaker.
pooponthebrain
Positively or negatively?
dashers
The good thing about science is that what has been shown to be true one day, could be proven otherwise another.
thestorkasaurus
Most conclusions aren't refuted, just refined (at least hard sciences). Relativity shows Newton was nearly right instead of entirely right.
ChilledOutEntertainer
Newton's laws still hold completely under the conditions for which they were intended (non-relativistic). And they will forever.
HD226868
Or perhaps not. After all, cavemen thought the world was flat, but they also thought that fire is hot and can burn you.
Jupman
No ine thought the world was flat, that just a insult from the middle ages.
ChilledOutEntertainer
Science doesn't ever show what is true, but it does show what is false. Scientific models are approximations of reality.
BlumpkinDangle
As scientists we do not "prove" anything. That is a legal term. But you're right, with new technology and repeated experimentation comes 1/2
dashers
Proof is for whisky and mathematicians eh? I think most people accept proof as whatever p-values are relevant.
BlumpkinDangle
New understandings. This is what learning is all about. The key is to acnoledge the possibility that you could be wrong and then test more.
Rips4w
The scariest part is that a lot of people do not give a shit what the truth is. The truth is whatever they choose to believe.
LOlivingVE
Does he mean different trials of the same experiment? Like if experiments are repeatable it's not an opinion?
lawideas
Numerous experiments in the 19th century "proved" black people were less intelligent than whites. Science is subject to prejudice, too.
sjokoladenam
Semantics. Making the comment we have to assume he talks about pure science or else we can just comment what you said to anything.
danielsan1977
Experiments using faulty testing algorithms is not the fault of science. It's the fault of racist dumdums.
Sc00ba5teeve
Science doesn't deal in truth, only in the most reasonable current explanation. If you want truth, you need religion or math.
spudcosmic
I don't think you really understand how science works. Mathematical models are used to prove experiments.
mmmhmmmm
Are you suggesting religion purports the truth? Or religion is the truth?
Sc00ba5teeve
That religion purports the truth. Truth is also found in math because we've created the rules for the system that we use.
schroeder
Well, you're more or less correct on needing math for truth, at least.
tooomanysteves
I think you mean philosophy, if you want Truth.
ImBrucemanNoBatwayneFuck
Science means, literally, "knowledge." It aims to find truth, but unlike religion it has the humility to admit it is wrong when it is.
FredGarvinMaleProstitute
that's why it is of utmost importance to alter the data so as to achieve reproducible results.
StillbornGod
While that does happen, the mere existence of peer reviews and independant recreation severely inhibits its effectiveness
DeepAnalTongue
Not really. Just look at the positive spin put on statin studies. Technically correct, but citing relative results, not absolute.
blakeatwork
It's supposed to, but it is certainly not immune to influence
StillbornGod
No, I agree, but the anti-scientific community likes to blow it way out of proportion
blakeatwork
Internally, there is worry about being able to replicate published/reviewed experiments and studies.
limerind
apparently unaware that there is a reproducability crisis in most of the social sciences right now.
thethirdeye
A science strawman. Now I've seen everything.
soluwalana
Social sciences aren't science then...
HD226868
Social sciences. You mean the one where it's impossible to get the same layout because even the same people change over time?
EmmersumBigguns
Social Science is not a science.
BattloidKouji
There's a big problem with that in ALL sciences, because funding is given primarily for new discoveries, and not for verifying other (1)
BattloidKouji
people's studies. It's a major component of the peer review system that is kind of missing from modern academia right now. (2)
d0o0o0d
Not just the social sciences. Medicine is having a hell of a time reproducing pharma studies, too. Has a huge impact on medical advances.
DeepAnalTongue
More like pharma studies are being manipulated to show positive results, even if not statistically significant because - money.
Curiousone545
Well, technically social "sciences" are known as a soft science, because they arn't really beholden to the scientific method. One reasons I1
Curiousone545
2)lost interest in Archaeology. I'm not interested in your opinion, what are the facts. Conjecture is so flawed, and more or less useless.
jmartkdr
As an anthropologist, anthropology has never been a science. Sociology *could be*, but often isn't
Curiousone545
Yes and no, it is still presented as a science. (social science), but it's not. I have two degrees- Anthro and Geography. I know.. haha
ItTastesLikePurple
Hell, even the natural sciences suck at reproduciblility.
imaginethatthatthatthat
From a natural product chemist. Never repeat a bioassay more then 3 times.
maniacalmacaroni
Physics and chemistry beg to differ, and in all other fields, if the same circumstances do not produce the same result, they're probably not
maniacalmacaroni
Truly the same circumstances. Sciences with too many variables make it seem like science is not cut and dry, but science is cut and dry.
capthammerreynolds
the problem is isolating variables which is so damn hard to do
Cornios
Currently writing a paper detailing why this exact problem is debilitating research into root-root interactions. It's as fun as it sounds
theuniverseissoup
Until a few years ago I honestly had no idea there were people who didn't "Believe" in science. In Canada, it's a weird concept.
NighHoon
Nobody should ever "believe" in science; nobody has to. It's all just facts and data, beyond our petty "beliefs." Leave faith to the church.
Dranton12
In America some of us wish it was harder to believe.
Niggulon
Why?
Dranton12
Because theoretically there would be more logical well reasoned people in America and less twat waffles in the whitehouse.
Traygibby
Take this fancy science machine that i dont understand
aDefenseless9yearOldGirl
Like what?
erbiumyttriumytterbium
Nothing is a weird concept in the good ol' USA. Look at our latest presidential election.
dangerousDoc
Yeah it's not too common. I don't agree with many soft science things mostly because they have shit methods and poor controls
Markuspsyches
In canada, and like little over half at my work don't. You name it moon landing, evolution, etc (of course they highly religious)
MrScud
You dont believe in science, you understand it.
SoupCanMan
Don't be silly everyone believes in science. When someone says they don't, it's code for "fuck you, I won't do what you tell me". Usually1/2
SoupCanMan
Because they are lazy, want to make money, or both. As long as the direct consequences don't effect them, they will continue to "not believe
dashers
Same in the UK, but as it's becoming an issue in America, UK media are talking about it here. Our idiots are now copying.
theuniverseissoup
Like, even if you believe it's a virtual simulation, the measurements of the pixel's properties are still relevant. It's a head scratcher.
DorMin2
“people in this country have had enough of experts” fucking Michael Gove
quadralol
If there was ever a time where censorship was a good thing... this might be it.
Nottheuseryouarelookingfor
Seriously? Censorship is the exact thing "fake news" bullshit is going for. While not explicitly blocking it, it turns real news into satire
quadralol
Joke, brother. It's a joke.
Nottheuseryouarelookingfor
Well shit..my apologies then.
BritishBatman
is taking off bigger 'cause'a' trump's fake news fucking shite, don't want to believe something? It's fake news.
codepoet2
Eh. Started way before Trump
Catandhercat
Except for the ass tonne of actual fake news stories making the rounds these days
lungbudda
A buddy of mine's sister doesn't believe in science she argued with me that dinosaurs were a lie.
theuniverseissoup
These same people use gps and take tylenol for a headache
lungbudda
Lol
LMeire
My step-dad thought you could get infinite fresh water by freeze-drying rocks, and used this to explain why 3rd-world charities are scams.
TraceofSpades
I need to hear the rest of this reasoning.
LMeire
But as any Oregon Freeze Dry employee knows, there's water in literally everything, which means those African countries without river 2/
LMeire
access just aren't trying hard enough to get it and want hand outs. Then they use the money to make more commercials or something. 3/3
LMeire
It took over an hour to convince him that water isn't an element, and honestly I'm not sure if he understood it or if he's just humoring us.
LMeire
Only 10% of Africa gets enough water to farm with, and this is largely concentrated around the 6-ish rivers. So yeah, dry. 1/?
DarkSock
If you die in Canada, do you die in real life?
KharnTheAngry
You do
DrunkAnna
Your apology makes it real.
DarkSock
Then… in Canada Donald Trump would be immortal?
IOnceShatAPlum
Gotta ask the Queen
DarkSock
Does Canada Queen have an ovipositor that she stabs into your chest cavity to fill it with eggs?
theuniverseissoup
One of the great questions...I don't think anyone really knows for sure
DarkSock
Nobody knows.
HowDoIMemes
Well, my grandma, great grandma and great aunt haven't contacted me from real life, so 99% yes