I believe in the process of science but I don't believe in the "science is settled" crowd or the politicized science. There is a replication crisis in science right now in that something like 2/3rds of scientific studies cannot be replicated.
It requires no black magic, no kool aid, but it does require the ability to think analytically, an attribute sadly lacking in nearly half of all Americans today.
Both of these.
Particularly what FHP said that a lot of research has been subject to meta-analysis and a lot of studies have not had outcomes replicated. It is important to review what is contributing to this and explore limitations and even potential unmentioned limitations.
-Steamy
A lot of science is not replicated because when you read some studies, and possess a clear and analytical mind, the result is so clearly obvious that only a dimwit would think it needs to be replicated. That would be the science that is most likely, but not absolutely, settled science. The results of science are generally a snapshot in time. It might be settled science for now, and then another aspect comes along, and it turns out it wasn't settled after all. Some science deniers (who are dumbshits) are binary folks who require absolute certainty, not understanding or accepting that many, if not most, things in this world have at least some element of uncertainty. And then some things, like the acceleration of gravity being 32'/s/s at sea level on planet Earth is settled science. For the time being.
Previous Topic
Index
