The vast majority of science is fake and or wrong.
The wrong part we can’t do anything about, but the fake part is a tragedy that we can and should correct.
Discussion
I agree and intend to fix this
Science is a method for understanding the natural world.
Calling science fake or wrong is retarded.
Just because the mainstream media labels it science when researchers paid by a corporation say the product made by the corporation is safe does not make that science.
Thats called corruption, not science.
Please do better, this isn't twitter.
Large parts of science are flat out wrong. That’s how science works. The fake part is academic fraud and the corporate malfeasance you’re pointing at.
Science is a method for understanding the natural world.
What do you mean by "large parts of science"?
Corporations paying researchers to give them the answers they want is not part of science, it's corruption.
Your gripe is with the FDA, Monsanto, Pfizer, etc. not science
He is talking about a fact that string theory was not able to produce any observable prediction despite dominating physics for over 50 years ;)
I don't get into theoretical physics, that shit is way above my intellect.
But from what I understand, they believe that there are tiny "strings" of energy that vibrate between at least 11 dimensions, inside of protons and neutrons.
Or maybe it's inside whatever protons and neutrons have inside them.
I don't think any of it has been proven so it's not even made it to the theory stage, it'll take technology a long time to catch up to those peoples brains
Exactly. This is spoken by someone who is genuinely too dumb to understand natural science.
Neither of you seem to have any awareness of what the replicability crises is or how modeling has taken over. There’s also p hacking, harking, cherry picking etc… Fraudulent untested science is the norm these days.
This is why Joe Carlasare snickers when you talk. It’s just pathetic levels of cope & retardation.
You fuckin idiots will share Bitcoin models with THREE DATA POINTS😂
“Bitcoin cycle theory” - someone who believes science is fake
I love Joe but let’s not pretend he’s not wrong just as often as I am lol 😂
For many “scientists” it’s all about publishing as many papers as possible. They’ll hack and fake the statistics as hard as they have to. It’s painful to watch and most people have no idea it’s happening. I don’t know the percentage but a very large number of studies can’t be replicated. IF anyone even attempts to
Could we fund an institution to just be devoted to replicating papers?
It sounds like a complete waste of money but i don’t see how else we can get to the bottom of it 😮💨
Vast majority? Eh. I think its just that people jump to conclusions.
ɪᴛ'ꜱ ɴᴏᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ᴠᴀꜱᴛ ᴍᴀᴊᴏʀɪᴛʏ. ɪᴛ'ꜱ ᴛʜᴇ ᴠᴀꜱᴛ ᴍᴀᴊᴏʀɪᴛʏ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ɢᴇᴛꜱ ᴘʀᴏᴍᴏᴛᴇᴅ ʙʏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴍᴇᴅɪᴀ.
ᴍʏ ꜰᴀᴠᴏᴜʀɪᴛᴇ ʀᴇꜱᴇᴀʀᴄʜᴇʀ ᴡʜᴏ ɪꜱ ᴄᴏɴꜱᴛᴀɴᴛʟʏ ꜱᴄᴏᴜʀɪɴɢ ᴛʜᴇ ᴊᴏᴜʀɴᴀʟ ꜱɪᴛᴇꜱ ᴀɴᴅ ᴏᴛʜᴇʀꜱ ɪꜱ ᴅɪɢɢɪɴɢ ᴜᴘ ɪɴᴛᴇʀᴇꜱᴛɪɴɢ ꜱᴛᴜꜰꜰ ᴏɴ ᴀ ᴅᴀɪʟʏ ʙᴀꜱɪꜱ, ʙᴇɴ ᴅᴀᴠɪᴅꜱᴏɴ, ʜɪꜱ ꜱᴜʙᴊᴇᴄᴛ ɪꜱ ᴍᴀɪɴʟʏ ꜱᴘᴀᴄᴇ ᴡᴇᴀᴛʜᴇʀ ᴀɴᴅ ᴄʟɪᴍᴀᴛᴇ ᴄʏᴄʟᴇꜱ. ᴘʀᴏʙᴀʙʟʏ ᴛʜᴇ ᴍᴀᴊᴏʀɪᴛʏ ᴏꜰ ᴡʜᴀᴛ ʜᴇ ꜰɪɴᴅꜱ ɪꜱ ꜱᴛᴜꜰꜰ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ᴜɴᴄᴏᴠᴇʀꜱ ᴛʜɪɴɢꜱ ᴛʜᴀᴛ ꜱᴜᴘᴘᴏʀᴛ ʜɪꜱ ʜʏᴘᴏᴛʜᴇꜱɪꜱ ᴀʙᴏᴜᴛ ᴛʜᴇ ᴄʏᴄʟɪᴄ ᴛʀɪɢɢᴇʀꜱ ᴇᴠᴇɴ ɪꜰ ᴛʜᴇ ᴘᴀᴘᴇʀ ɪꜱ ᴛʀʏɪɴɢ ᴛᴏ ᴘᴀᴘᴇʀ ɪᴛ ᴏᴠᴇʀ ᴡɪᴛʜ AGW ᴛʏᴘᴇ ᴄʟɪᴍᴀᴛᴇ ᴄʜᴀɴɢᴇ ʙᴜɴᴋ
ᴡʜᴀᴛ ɪꜱ ᴛʀᴜᴇ, ʜᴏᴡᴇᴠᴇʀ, ɪꜱ ᴍᴏꜱᴛ ᴏꜰ ᴛʜᴇ "ʀᴇꜱᴇᴀʀᴄʜ" ɪꜱ ꜰɪɴᴅɪɴɢ ᴀ ᴡᴀʏ ᴛᴏ ᴊᴜꜱᴛɪꜰʏ ᴀ ᴄᴏɴᴄʟᴜꜱɪᴏɴ. ᴍʏ ᴘᴇʀꜱᴏɴᴀʟ ꜰᴀᴠᴏᴜʀɪᴛᴇ ᴇxᴀᴍᴘʟᴇ ᴡᴀꜱ ᴛʜᴇ "MDMA ɪꜱ ɴᴇᴜʀᴏᴛᴏxɪᴄ" ᴘᴀᴘᴇʀ ᴡʜɪᴄʜ ᴛʜᴇʏ ʀᴇᴛʀᴀᴄᴛᴇᴅ ᴡʜᴇɴ ᴛʜᴇʏ ᴅɪꜱᴄᴏᴠᴇʀᴇᴅ ᴛʜᴇʏ ᴀᴄᴄɪᴅᴇɴᴛᴀʟʟʏ ɢᴀᴠᴇ ᴛʜᴇ ʀᴀᴛꜱ ᴍᴇᴛʜ ɪɴꜱᴛᴇᴀᴅ ᴏꜰ ᴍᴏʟʟʏ
Science is a method.
The results of any scientific research remain a matter of consensus.
Humans agree on the mathematical 0.
The rest is all consensus
nostr:nevent1qqs929a4wdxym704juv9rpjxse5s54pv8jvsy905lq2r3xwh4lal9jgpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqnwcykm
Science is NOT wrong. It can’t be because it is a systematic method of acquiring knowledge about the natural world through observations and experiments.
Reproducible experiments serve as the bedrock for useful theories (Eg. Newton), but new experimental findings may reveal nature’s greater mysteries (Eg. relativity). Science is a bias-proof rigorous action to gain deeper understanding of the universe. Usually, it proceeds one funeral at a time, falsifying old theory and establishing new.
What is wrong are agenda-driven theories, manufactured data, corrupted journals & funding structures , and the fiat culture of publish count determining academic status.
nostr:nevent1qqs929a4wdxym704juv9rpjxse5s54pv8jvsy905lq2r3xwh4lal9jgpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqnwcykm
Same with history
Being wrong is part of progress. Being fake is a choice. One advances knowledge, the other poisons trust.
Luckily Bitcoin fixes this.
Which parts? Please tell me you haven’t gone flat earther 🤣
Fr
Most people and things are fake in the world right now, unfortunately. When attention becomes the commodity, people will betray themselves
Error is inevitable. Dishonesty is not.
We can defund. These fake scientists have grown accustomed sucking on the teat of big government. You hit them hard where their belly is soft. And I think defunding is they way.
Shrinking the government will do wonders for both science and media.
NSA is an example of how truth seeking organizations should be run. By not taking government money they do not become beholden to the Government. It is a good starting point for science also.
Hey man, it's right enough to have given us computers, the internet, rockets, cars, refrigeration, airplanes, and all the technological wonders of the modern world.
So you notice that everything on your list is pre 1990?
Completion of the Human Genome Project, development of CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing, commercialization of reusable rockets (Falcon 9), detection of gravitational waves, discovery of the Higgs boson, discovery of thousands of exoplanets, emergence of large language models and generative AI, invention of graphene, first-ever image of a black hole, successful landing of a rover on Mars (Curiosity and Perseverance), development of CAR-T cell therapy for cancer, advancement of quantum computing with demonstrated quantum supremacy, creation of the first synthetic bacterial cell, discovery of accelerating cosmic expansion (dark energy).
Might've forgotten a few along the way.
Anyone that holds science as their foundation of epistemology becomes an easy target for control.
What fields of science does Bitcoin allow us to correct? ⏳
Whatever gets you that next grant so you can stay in the safety and warmth of your delusional university where you can play authoritarian ruler over your students.
When bitcoiners say dumb ass retard shit like this it reminds me why people think we’re a cult
Did you study math/physics/chemistry/biology? Or are you someone with absolutely no ability to actually complete problem solving but on the outside you’re critical of some shit you could never personally do?
I have a decade of experience in analytical chemistry. Let’s hear it. Tell me about mass spectrometry and how it’s flawed. I’ll wait.
I’m not saying measurement science like mass spectrometry is fake that’s a category error. The claim isn’t “science bad.” The claim is as fields move away from hard physical constraints and into noisy inference with career-driven incentives, false positives explode.
Dude, even in present-day conditions the worst offenders of the replication science are in slop fields like “social psychology”, or in fields where the books are cooked by people wanting to appeal to investors (biomedicine) or thinktanks and ideologies (economics).
Even then, with all the perverse incentives and new lower integrity participants allowed to publish as a result of globalization, science is still working quite fine in a statistical sense. Most studies in real fields are probably not wrong. Fraud, intellectual laziness, and a complete lack of understanding of statistics poisoning the well of publications are real problems. But things are not that bad.
Couple things. I am in fact being hyperbolic in the OP In order to generate a conversation. Next you’re right that it’s been largely slop fields, but unfortunately the replication problem is growing and entering fields like medicine for instance. Lastly id say we can’t blame globalization because many of the most visible failures involve elite western institutions, top journals, and senior researchers. The incentives are baked into the prestige economy of science itself, not imported from the margins.
It's somewhat upsetting that we refer to observations and assumptions derived from the practice of science as science itself in the first place.
Or perhaps that we use a word that already meant 'body of knowledge' for the name of a method that isn't actually about knowledge, but about exploring what we DON'T know.
Probably boils down to unfortunate timing with the advent of epistemological skepticism coming largely after the formulation of the method.
That, or just the general antipathy for truth by the powers that should not be.
Just wait until you go down the 8 inches per mile squared rabbit hole.
This pains me so much. I studied psychology some 20 years ago and it pains me to see so much science being fake. I love the search for knowledge and so many “scientists” are just grifters, publishing utter slop.
What are we supposed to do about this? 🤬
and the hardest part is correcting wrong ideas.
nostr:nevent1qqs929a4wdxym704juv9rpjxse5s54pv8jvsy905lq2r3xwh4lal9jgpp4mhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mqnwcykm