Home

questioning scientists...

Posted By: white marlin

questioning scientists... - 09/02/21 11:17 PM

I'm noticing a trend over the last few years: it seems like to question a scientist is akin to being the epitome of the Flat-Earthers.

they aren't infallible!
Posted By: warrior

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/02/21 11:34 PM

Science has become inflated with self importance and forgotten the original premise of science which is presumption of ignorance leading to research. Humility is accepting what one does not know.
Posted By: NonPCfed

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/02/21 11:47 PM

The new secular religion, science and government. I see it everyday, they just won't admit that its their religion...
Posted By: Pawnee

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/02/21 11:48 PM

Yes it’s now a big no no. CDC stopped releasing data in May. Your just supposed to read and take to heart what they tell you it says. Same with NAOO and NASA on climate change. Just take our word for it we will tell you the truth!’
Posted By: walleye101

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/02/21 11:48 PM

Unfortunately science has been politicized like everything else.
Posted By: SNIPERBBB

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/02/21 11:55 PM

Good post for this...excerpt from Aliens Cause Global Warming-lecture from Dr. Michael Crichton

Quote
Worst of all was the behavior of the Scientific American, which seemed intent on proving the
post-modernist point that it was all about power, not facts. The Scientific American attacked
Lomborg for eleven pages, yet only came up with nine factual errors despite their assertion that
the book was “rife with careless mistakes.” It was a poor display, featuring vicious ad hominem
attacks, including comparing him to a Holocaust denier. The issue was captioned: “Science
defends itself against the Skeptical Environmentalist.” Really. Science has to defend itself? Is
this what we have come to?


When Lomborg asked for space to rebut his critics, he was given only a page and a half. When
he said it wasn’t enough, he put the critics’ essays on his web page and answered them in detail.
Scientific American threatened copyright infringement and made him take the pages down.

Further attacks since, have made it clear what is going on. Lomborg is charged with heresy.
That’s why none of his critics needs to substantiate their attacks in any detail. That’s why the
facts don’t matter. That’s why they can attack him in the most vicious personal terms. He’s a
heretic.


Of course, any scientist can be charged as Galileo was charged. I just never thought I’d see the
Scientific American in the role of Mother Church.


Is this what science has become? I hope not. But it is what it will become, unless there is a
concerted effort by leading scientists to aggressively separate science from policy. The late
Philip Handler, former president of the National Academy of Sciences, said that “Scientists best
serve public policy by living within the ethics of science, not those of politics. If the scientific
community will not unfrock the charlatans, the public will not discern the difference—science
and the nation will suffer.”


Personally, I don’t worry about the nation. But I do worry about
science.


Full lecture here: https://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/Crichton2003.pdf
Posted By: Blaine County

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 12:03 AM

A fundamental part of science is questioning science.

However to properly do it you have to question science with science. YouTube, Facebook, internet memes and the crap spewed by most politicians is not science. And, the "science" from those sources is rarely credible.
Posted By: white marlin

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 12:16 AM

Originally Posted by Blaine County
A fundamental part of science is questioning science.

However to properly do it you have to question science with science. YouTube, Facebook, internet memes and the crap spewed by most politicians is not science. And, the "science" from those sources is rarely credible.


but what if you're not ALLOWED to question it...

and anyway, I'd submit to you that ANYBODY can/SHOULD not only question, but INTERROGATE "science" !

if it's true "Science", it will stand up to scrutiny, regardless of who asks the questions.

True?
Posted By: warrior

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 12:18 AM

When the university was coopted the grant machine bought the science department.
Posted By: SNIPERBBB

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 12:23 AM

Originally Posted by warrior
When the university was coopted the grant machine bought the science department.



Everyone remembers the Military-Industrial Complex warning from Eisenhower. They forget this part:

Quote
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been over shadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
Posted By: Blaine County

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 12:37 AM

Originally Posted by white marlin
Originally Posted by Blaine County
A fundamental part of science is questioning science.

However to properly do it you have to question science with science. YouTube, Facebook, internet memes and the crap spewed by most politicians is not science. And, the "science" from those sources is rarely credible.


but what if you're not ALLOWED to question it...

and anyway, I'd submit to you that ANYBODY can/SHOULD not only question, but INTERROGATE "science" !

if it's true "Science", it will stand up to scrutiny, regardless of who asks the questions.

True?


Sure, question it. I think common sense is an important component when questioning science but it does not override data and actual rigorous analysis.

And White Marlin, this is not a shot at you. You raised a good point.

Science has always been contaminated to a degree by religion, politics and now it's the darn internet. Everybody thinks they are an expert because they watched some YouTube video or skimmed a Facebook meme.
Posted By: NonPCfed

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 01:37 AM

Blaine County- Have you ever published in a peer-review journal...?

I just got back a review that had 4 reviewers. Not one questioned the results I had presented. One of their largest criticisms was there was nothing "new" here, a couple insisted that what I was showing was commonly available, which it isn't given our scope of discussion, frequency of observations, or length of time. The other major criticism when bunched together were questions about the overall project which has been published in several other articles in other journals that none of these people had read or tried to read after I gave them the citations. My geo-statistician, who is far more published than me, said all the reviewers were superficial and we could have easily addressed their concerns. But no, the editor has better things to do and won't answer my e-mail. I guess we move on after Labor Day. This is after two "higher impact" journals wouldn't even send the manuscript out for review. I guess its not sexy enough of a topic or not enough chicken-little attitude about it. Peer review is generally the luck of the draw.

People are still people, and with most "prestigious" people its more about them getting their egos stroked than anything else. My paper will get published, it will just take more time to play the game...
Posted By: maintenanceguy

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 02:24 AM

We've dumbed down our education system. Specifically science and math. Women and minorities haven't been as successful in these fields - or most likely just not as interested in entering these fields. To solve this problem (that isn't a problem), we're teaching a lot less science in science classes. The less people understand science, the more mystical and amazing it is. Uneducated people don't question scientists - because they aren't able too.
Posted By: Flint Lock

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 02:25 AM

Originally Posted by NonPCfed
The new secular religion, science and government. I see it everyday, they just won't admit that its their religion...


Couldn't agree more. A local Christian radio station did a segment a couple months ago about "scientism". I wish I could remember the speaker, it was very well done.

Originally Posted by walleye101
Unfortunately science has been politicized like everything else.


That is more true than most realize. I close member of my family is a scientist, and for all his academic training and credentials, his scientific opinions are very much influenced by his world view. You can guess which end of the spectrum that is.
Posted By: yotetrapper30

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 02:39 AM

Not all science.

If you don't question a doctor that states that there are only two genders... and that that is proven by X and Y chromosomes... you are a bigot.

Science is only infallible when it supports the left's agenda.
Posted By: J Staton

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 02:48 AM

My favorite don't dare follow the science subject has to do with the unborn. The same clowns spewing follow the science vehemently defend not following the science in this situation.
Posted By: Blaine County

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 03:20 AM

Originally Posted by NonPCfed
Blaine County- Have you ever published in a peer-review journal...?

I just got back a review that had 4 reviewers. Not one questioned the results I had presented. One of their largest criticisms was there was nothing "new" here, a couple insisted that what I was showing was commonly available, which it isn't given our scope of discussion, frequency of observations, or length of time. The other major criticism when bunched together were questions about the overall project which has been published in several other articles in other journals that none of these people had read or tried to read after I gave them the citations. My geo-statistician, who is far more published than me, said all the reviewers were superficial and we could have easily addressed their concerns. But no, the editor has better things to do and won't answer my e-mail. I guess we move on after Labor Day. This is after two "higher impact" journals wouldn't even send the manuscript out for review. I guess its not sexy enough of a topic or not enough chicken-little attitude about it. Peer review is generally the luck of the draw.

People are still people, and with most "prestigious" people its more about them getting their egos stroked than anything else. My paper will get published, it will just take more time to play the game...


No. And, by the way, the peer review process has not been great for science.
Posted By: SNIPERBBB

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 03:55 AM

Peer review in the way it's presented to the public is what hasnt been good for science. Especially since in today's world where most people would be lucky to get past the abstract of any study.
Posted By: NonPCfed

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 03:58 AM

Quote
Peer review in the way it's presented to the public is what hasnt been good for science. Especially since in today's world where most people would be lucky to get past the abstract of any study.


Most people could "get" my abstracts because I'm not over technical and I'm anomaly, I actually remember who pays me in the end wink...
Posted By: SNIPERBBB

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 04:16 AM

Originally Posted by NonPCfed
Quote
Peer review in the way it's presented to the public is what hasnt been good for science. Especially since in today's world where most people would be lucky to get past the abstract of any study.


Most people could "get" my abstracts because I'm not over technical and I'm anomaly, I actually remember who pays me in the end wink...

It's not so much about getting it..it's the ability to keep reading past the first paragraph. Not the author's fault generally.
Posted By: Blaine County

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 11:23 AM

Peer review is a problem because new ideas are killed or buried by jealous, competing or otherwise obstinate peer reviewers. Politics, disciplinary and societal, also infiltrate the process as do stupid peers.
Posted By: Gary Benson

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 12:02 PM

Society has been taught to believe that a person with a 4 year college degree is smarter than anybody else. You can see where that has got us today.
Posted By: Dirt

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 03:52 PM

In a former life I used to routinely fight scientist. If you consider wildlife biologists scientist? They conduct studies and collect data. Then they interpret (subjective) the data. Then they come to a conclusion (subjective) from this process. One has to understand the flaws in the data collection, interpretation, and conclusion in order to come to a different conclusion (subjective). Then you have to make your case. Most people believe what they want to believe and will not look at all the information necessary to draw their own conclusion.
Posted By: Kansas Cat

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 04:44 PM

A person with experience knows what will probably happen. A person with an education in mathematics, physics and chemistry understands why something happens.
Posted By: BigBob

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 04:54 PM

Originally Posted by white marlin
they aren't infallible!


They think they are! Many of the College kids working for Mo's DNR treat you like a retarded red haired step child when you deal with them and almost can't be bothered unless you have some kind of degree. The population is just a pool that pays taxes for their studies and salary. They don't believe a machinist knows what a Mt Lion looks like, and for many years their presence was denied, even when road kills started showing up. Same for Bears, now we're having our first Bear season in many decades.
Posted By: waggler

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 04:59 PM

There are still plenty of true scientists around.

Here is how to tell the difference:
A real scientist starts with a hypothesis; it can even be a hypothesis that reflects his particular bias, that's okay.
But then as data is accumulated a true scientist considers all the incoming data.
A pseudo-scientists simply rejects all incoming data that does not support his original hypothesis.

We see some of this pseudo-science demonstrated by "scientists" involved in climate change issues, and young earth adherents.

Most scientists are objective, because they actually want to arrive at a truism since truth pays the bills in the long run.
Posted By: waggler

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 05:02 PM

I should add to the above; pseudo-scientists are mostly found in fields where they are supporting a particular ideology. This generally occurs with so-called scientists hired by government agencies.

Scientist employed in private Industry must arrive at truths, or they will not keep their jobs very long.
Posted By: Dirt

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 05:16 PM

I'll give you an real life example of the scientific process here. There was a biometrician that wanted to test a survey method to estimate black and brown bear populations here. So the method was an experiment in itself. They spent money on planes, fuel, and other logistics to conduct this experiment prior to the trees leafing out. the money was spent and the project was organized and unfortunately we experienced an unusually early green up. They ran with the aerial survey anyway. The raw data showed only bears in the subalpine open regions, none in the forest. If I remember right, they observed 8 total brown bears. Somehow they whipped up a black bear estimate which was similar to the old extrapolated estimate based on Mark Recapture. They concluded that not enough browns were seen to make an estimate. Several years later ADFG referred to this study as coming up with a brown bear estimate of about 800 bears.

If you knew what happened, you would know both estimates are garbage.
Posted By: SNIPERBBB

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 05:35 PM

Was that disclosed in the study? If so, again that goes to the point that policymakers don't ever read past the abstractor executive summary of whatever nonsense is put in front of them. If not, that's malpractice on the researchers part
Posted By: NonPCfed

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 05:41 PM

Or the money bag bureaucrats wanted to go forward with the research because they had already spent the money--"we're going to get some sort of results, dam...t!!" But yes, if the details of the issues of that spring weren't disclosed that's sloppy and poor work. If people aren't willing to fall on their swords to maintain integrity, well, you've just taken a big step towards whoredom.
Posted By: Providence Farm

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 05:41 PM

Questioning the science is not allowed.

I was at my Dr. For results for an MRI. (I may have MS Brain scan to come) We had a a couple other discussions one about adhd. I gave my opinion and observations with supporting ideas. Basically it's a survival trait. If we were focused on a task like skinning, or making tools we would not notice the predators approach and would be killed in years past. His eyes lit up and he got excited animated even. It seems he was just having the same discussion with a specialist much smarter then him. In the discussions he was the student. I just smiled and asked him " so are you telling my I came to the same conclusion as someone so highly educated on my own?) He answered yes.

Then I asked him about the covid shots. " I'm pro vaccine anything I can do to stop a disease I will I'm vaccinate " I asked a few questions- being new he said the science was proven. 2. Can you still get covid and transmitt it after having the shot. YeS. Ok so how dose the shot stop the disease? Deer in the head lights look no comment and very quickly excuses himself.
Posted By: Dirt

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 06:03 PM

Originally Posted by NonPCfed
Or the money bag bureaucrats wanted to go forward with the research because they had already spent the money--"we're going to get some sort of results, dam...t!!" But yes, if the details of the issues of that spring weren't disclosed that's sloppy and poor work. If people aren't willing to fall on their swords to maintain integrity, well, you've just taken a big step towards whoredom.


The people involved got paid and retired with full benefits. Is that whoring?
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 06:16 PM

Science has done wondrous things and there can be no honest debate about that.
But as are all things humanistic, the pendulum has swing too far in the other direction whereby science: defined centuries ago as that which can be observable, repeatable, and measurable attempting to minimize bias, is now all too often, full blown bias.

Those early scientists, folks like Christians Galileo and Newton and pantheist Einstein sought to seek deep answers for incredibly complex concepts and questions. Grand endeavors all.
Each of these brilliant men were enthusiastic (en = in; theos = god) all their lives.
Today, scientists who labor in deep ways are the outcasts and we even have short mockery names for them; names like geeks.
Smart people today don't need to study anything. They already have answers. They are the 21st century "no" it alls. No one dare oppose me!
They permeate our culture at every level.

But the wonder of what we try to discover is worthy.

Thomas Edison's last words; It is beautiful over there.

Steve Job's last words; Oh wow. Oh wow. Oh wow.

Blessings,
Mark


Posted By: Gary Benson

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 06:59 PM

In Nebraska the G&P asked rural mail carriers to stop at intersections of the roads and listen for rooster pheasants. That's how they calculated the numbers of pheasants in the rural areas. Don't question the science. They're college educated.
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 07:34 PM

Originally Posted by Gary Benson
In Nebraska the G&P asked rural mail carriers to stop at intersections of the roads and listen for rooster pheasants. That's how they calculated the numbers of pheasants in the rural areas. Don't question the science. They're college educated.


I was in that arena (for a short while thankfully).
It's called "desk" research.
"Hi Suzie. Could you email me how many pheasants you heard today so I can put my approval stamp on that? Thank you. We'll talk tomorrow. I'll be here in the office if you need to find me. Bye."
Posted By: Gary Benson

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 07:56 PM

Oops...I'm taking tomorrow off. Make that day after tomorrow.
Posted By: Scuba1

Re: questioning scientists... - 09/03/21 08:29 PM

Don't mistake science with politics. Thats like saying the Miley is a general. There is a big difference between a scientist and the knock of political propaganda activists that are called upon to legitimize bad decisions of the government. It has zip to do with science.
© 2024 Trapperman Forums