• agamemnonymous
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    And peer-reviewed papers will reflect that dumbass.

    Yes, for that paper. Past work is not evidence for future work.

    I see the problem. When I say “science” I mean science.

    When you say “science,” you mean academia. I agree with most of your statements as they apply to academia. Academia is not science.

    • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You know companies that pursue scientific pursuits outside of academia still publish their work. They also tend to hire people with masters and doctorates from well-regarded academic institutions.

      • agamemnonymous
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Call it the Game, call it the science Meta, call it politics in the sciences, whatever you like. It’s an extension of the same fundamentalist principles. Whatever it is, isn’t science itself.

        • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Whatever it is, isn’t science itself

          But it is. More science than you’ve ever done it seems since you think one data point with no controls is somehow scientific.

          • agamemnonymous
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s asinine. The bureaucracy and politics surrounding the practice of science is explicitly not science itself. It is crucial to a career in in modern science sure, but it is not itself science.

            • Tavarin@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Peer-review is an incredibly important part of science, one of the most important in fact. So go ahead with your non-peer reviewed, no control “science”, and leave the real science to us scientists.

              • agamemnonymous
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Scientific consensus is determined by peer-review. Peer -reviewed consensus can, and has been down to be false.

                Absolute certainty still isn’t part of science. If it’s 100% certain and not falsifiable, it’s not science by definition. Just like an atom with 7 protons isn’t carbon, by definition. Nitrogen is an important and valid element, but it isn’t carbon.