Science

[Mott the Hoople]

":SCIENCE" nowdays is a leftist political propaganda arm, where "CONSENSU" is reached by a show of hands, instead of Scientific Method.

Like "TRANSGENDER FEMALES ARE REAL FEMALES"....


BS in Chemistry, U of Missouri at Rolla, now known as the Missouri School of Science and Technology.

How about you?

You’re conflating the social sciences with the natural sciences.

BA Human Biology (Chemistry minor) Wright State University. MS EH&S Mgt Findley College. I also did graduate studies at Palmer College and did research at the Ohio State University graduate school of Materials Science and Engineering. New a fellow at OSU who did his undergrad studies in materials science at Mizzou Rolla which has a top notch program.

[Mott the Hoople]

Science has largely failed because the people in science have all to often cared more about what was best for their careers than they did what was best for science.

Also, increasingly scientists are held in low regard, for cause.

You are many decades out of date.

Like hell I am. You’re the one in lala land. You’re probably a neophyte who never professionally studied science and technology or made a career in it.

It’s the anti-science crowd like you that have alienated most scientists from the GOP. Including me.

[cancel2 2022]

Like hell I am. You’re the one in lala land. You’re probably a neophyte who never professionally studied science and technology or made a career in it.

It’s the anti-science crowd like you that have alienated most scientists from the GOP. Including me.

I will therefore assume that you do not agree with Michael Shellenberger on the politicalisation and hijacking of climate science by various people for their own nefarious ends. It's becoming increasingly clear that the hysteria and alarmism is being exposed more and more, the Dems will be revealed as huxsters soon enough. What I do find surprising is that a bright guy like you can't see that, you will eventually though!

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...79#post3756479

[Hawkeye10]

I will therefore assume that you do not agree with Michael Shellenberger on the politicalisation and hijacking of climate science by various people for their own nefarious ends. It's becoming increasingly clear that the hysteria and alarmism is being exposed more and more, the Dems will be revealed as huxsters soon enough. What I do find surprising is that a bright guy like you can't see that, you will eventually though!

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...79#post3756479

Sounds like he has recently been getting his head warped at a Failed University.

That would explain the idiocy.

[Mott the Hoople]

I will therefore assume that you do not agree with Michael Shellenberger on the politicalisation and hijacking of climate science by various people for their own nefarious ends. It's becoming increasingly clear that the hysteria and alarmism is being exposed more and more, the Dems will be revealed as huxsters soon enough. What I do find surprising is that a bright guy like you can't see that, you will eventually though!

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...79#post3756479

You would be correct Tom. Nor do I agree with Larry Johnson about scientist politicizing evolutionary theory. Both positions are “God of the gaps” arguments.

[Mott the Hoople]

Sounds like he has recently been getting his head warped at a Failed University.

That would explain the idiocy.

I wouldn’t expect Tom to be to sympathetic with your position. I respect Tom’s dissent on the topic because he has actually studied science and has at least drawn his conclusions from informed dissenting sources and isn’t some tribal political hack who’s opinion is based on a tribal party affiliation.

[Phantasmal]

I wouldn’t expect Tom to be to sympathetic with your position. I respect Tom’s dissent on the topic because he has actually studied science and has at least drawn his conclusions from informed dissenting sources and isn’t some tribal political hack who’s opinion is based on a tribal party affiliation.

You’re joking right? Informed dissenting sources?

[PostmodernProphet]

What makes science unique from other philosophies is that science is specifically designed to be self correcting. .

to be fair, practical science may be self-correcting but the philosophy of science is not.......

[PostmodernProphet]

You’re conflating the social sciences with the natural sciences.

BA Human Biology (Chemistry minor) Wright State University. MS EH&S Mgt Findley College. I also did graduate studies at Palmer College and did research at the Ohio State University graduate school of Materials Science and Engineering. New a fellow at OSU who did his undergrad studies in materials science at Mizzou Rolla which has a top notch program.

the climate "crisis" had shown us that peer review has been replaced with political review..........perhaps instead of self-correcting you should speak of goal-correcting.......

[PostmodernProphet]

You would be correct Tom. Nor do I agree with Larry Johnson about scientist politicizing evolutionary theory. Both positions are “God of the gaps” arguments.

given that evolutionary science has replaced the old scientific method with "if it meets with our assumptions we can continue to assume it is true", it is disingenuous to claim anything is an "of the gaps" argument......

[cancel2 2022]

You would be correct Tom. Nor do I agree with Larry Johnson about scientist politicizing evolutionary theory. Both positions are “God of the gaps” arguments.

Well you're a bright guy, you'll see the light eventually.

[cancel2 2022]

You’re joking right? Informed dissenting sources?

Yes well we know how much you love Hot Whopper, which by the way has shut down, Sweet Sou has given up. You're an excellent example of someone that approaches such matters from a tribal political affiliation.

[Into the Night]

Number, please.

Go back and look it up yourself. RQAA.

[Into the Night]

What makes science unique from other philosophies is that science is specifically designed to be self correcting. Is science often wrong? Absolutely and more than lay people think. The truth is that in practicing science you will almost always be wrong more often than you’re right. The whole purpose of science is to determine what to the best of our knowledge are the facts about nature. The scientific methods purpose is to identify these facts but science is self correcting because one of its primary tenets is that all knowledge is tentative and all scientific knowledge is predicated on the basis that you
may be wrong. Even if the probability of being wrong is incredibly small, you still might be wrong. There are no absolutes in science. Just differing degrees of the probability of being correct. This concept makes science self correcting. When a new fact with a higher probability of being correct is discovered than what was previously believed then that belief must either be abandoned if that fact falsifies it or that belief must be modified to account for this new fact.

So that’s the humbling part of science. Being right is incredibly hard to do,

As to your point on science being abused by those outside of science with other agendas cannot be placed at the foot of science. Rather it is the individual’s responsibility to be literate in science so that they can question questionable science. In most cases where science is abused by those with agendas other than science it is almost always scientist who point that out.

This is also why scientist are the single most respected group of professionals.

Science is not facts. Science is not scientists. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.

[Into the Night]

Science has largely failed because the people in science have all to often cared more about what was best for their careers than they did what was best for science.

Also, increasingly scientists are held in low regard, for cause.

You are many decades out of date.

There DO seem to be a fair number of scientists these days that deny science. 'Science' is one of the most used buzzwords in media today.