Schizo The whole "Trusting science makes you a soyboy" thing is a psyop to undermine objective truth

[raepson industries .ltc]

science isnt real

 

[ImSchizophrenicThough]

This should be proof that we should work towards improving scientific work and not abandon it as a whole albeit

I'm not sure the institutions involved can be reformed, it would help immensely if the federal government and the EU cut their funding, but that's not happening.
We are also outside this community, so we cannot actively do anything about it. (Except trusting or not trusting the soyience)

At the point where scientific work becomes as inaccurate as lysenkoism, there is no cost in abandoning it, in fact, it might save a whole lot of money.

I get where you're coming from, but I don't think people will abandon reason en masse just to oppositegem, the garbage institutions we have now will just get replaced by something new.

 

[NiggerRigger]

Don't care.

 

[bowl]

op needs xis booster shots.

 

[Cobbert]

I'm not sure the institutions involved can be reformed, it would help immensely if the federal government and the EU cut their funding, but that's not happening.
We are also outside this community, so we cannot actively do anything about it. (Except trusting or not trusting the soyience)

At the point where scientific work becomes as inaccurate as lysenkoism, there is no cost in abandoning it, in fact, it might save a whole lot of money.

I get where you're coming from, but I don't think people will abandon reason en masse just to oppositegem, the garbage institutions we have now will just get replaced by something new.

Hopeful gem

 

[ImSchizophrenicThough]

That "something new" will be ME of course, der Ubersturmfauci of Allgemeinwissenschaft

 

[Stockstall]

View attachment 104523
I keep getting shown videos about the Chicago Bulls or the African British Broadcasting Corporation. I've been told it's based on my search history but I don't care about the NBA? Can someone explain this?

You are a good goy cobbert

 

[Cobbert]

You are a good goy cobbert

Fell for bait award

 

[Stockstall]

Fell for bait award

Where did you got the screenshots doe?

 

[1844 or Something]

Erm you're supposed to review and verify the science, not just trust in it

 

[Stephen]

Faith won, rationalism won

 

[Cobbert]

Where did you got the screenshots doe?

I searched up both videos and edited them together

 

[KingCargo]

You can't decide something is true when you can't prove or disprove it.

>Deciding something is true because it supports your worldview.

 

[(In)CelibatePsycho]

empiricism isnt the problem, it's the peer-review (academic circlejerking), reproduction crisis and the closed datasets researchers use.

All peer-review is doing is incentivizing forming cartels with other academics so everyone gets published regardless of quality.
None of them are interested in reproducing studies or verifying results, because that doesn't get you funding.
Lastly all actual data, the empirical facts, are completely inaccessible, even for other academics. There have been several scandals where peer-reviewed, lauded studies turned out to have used fraudulent data. The "science" has used these "studies" and its' "facts" to produce alzheimers medication for 20 years.
The vast majority of academics fail at the basic statistics necessary to determine if results are normative at all.

the basis of the scientific community is academic, federal and private funding, not empirical fact

What do you mean that the actual data are inaccessible?

 

[Gigafly]

I unironically believe vaccines are safe and effective.

 

[snuffereet]

What
Where am I

 

[Gigafly]

@Stephen goons to mares btw

 

[X Immigrant]

The devil loves the rational man.

 

[ImSchizophrenicThough]

What do you mean that the actual data are inaccessible?

Most datasets are either copyrighted or not published with the study. This isn't as shocking when you realize how big they can get.
Only the authors and the university have access to the data, but uni's dont always check and authors wont bother sending it to you. (or other researchers)

In studies worth a shit, data is reported as p>0.05 (test group's median is the same as the control group) or p<0.05 (test group median is distinct from control group) and they might give the actual p-value if you're lucky.
They might also add a table of the results or a simple graph but this isn't always the case.
If you see a study use percentages (50% did x 20% did y) there's a good chance they didnt have a control group or didnt publish the results of their control group because it didnt back their little narrative.

 

[(In)CelibatePsycho]

Most datasets are either copyrighted or not published with the study. This isn't as shocking when you realize how big they can get.
Only the authors and the university have access to the data, but uni's dont always check and authors wont bother sending it to you. (or other researchers)

In studies worth a shit, data is reported as p>0.05 (test group's median is the same as the control group) or p<0.05 (test group median is distinct from control group) and they might give the actual p-value if you're lucky.
They might also add a table of the results or a simple graph but this isn't always the case.
If you see a study use percentages (50% did x 20% did y) there's a good chance they didnt have a control group or didnt publish the results of their control group because it didnt back their little narrative.

?? I feel like I usually can access datasets in studies