You do not progress by "trusting the science"

[Travis99]

You progress by Questioning the Science.




Aristotl: Thought the earth was the center of the universe. Wrong

Galileo: Said the moon has nothing to do with the tides. Wrong

Newton: Sucked on mercury like it was nypat suking bidens cawk. Both Wrong!


At one time these men were the smartest people on the planet.






Never stop questioning the science brothers. Don't let the leftist agenda ridicule you for seeking truth.

[JayJ350]

"Trust the science" basically means "trust our experts"

Experts have been wrong throughout history regardless of credentials, qualifications, and authority.

[BlackJack619]

Research Bowl Shapped Earth.
#redpill

[N0rds]

"trust the science" is one of the most anti-science statements you can say.

[PenorBrahNoHomo]

See sig

[rhadam]

Humankind will be undone by our mistaken belief that we are much more intelligent than we actually are.

[ezmac31]

Do you know how much wincel is raging reading that???hahahahahaha









Hey wincel, u mad?

[The_cannibal]

The truth is that the majority of people in universities are not there because they are very smart, they are there because they do not like manual labor.

And I'm saying this as someone with multiple degrees and over 20 years of education, but I spent a lot of time tutoring other students, and the average stupidity is astounding. People don't even remember what they saw at the beginning of a trimester, and are horrified when the teacher/professor announces that the final exam will cover everything that was taught for the whole trimester. I have seen average grades of 30-40% in courses as easy as Calculus I, and even lower grades in tensor calculus (and we're talking about tensor calculus with a maximum of 2 indices, not with 4 indices as in general relativity). I've seen courses where more than 50% of the student didn't come even close to a passing grade.

Most of these people, even the ones with M Sc and PhDs, have no idea what science even is. They have no idea of the principles of intellectual rigor. Do you think that graduate students come up with a great idea for a study and then start working on it? The answer is no. You can go to the graduate area of a faculty and look at the boards with graduate studies opportunities, with the associated grants. The corporations subsidizing these studies EXPECT you to find that the null hypothesis is wrong, and if you find otherwise, you can be sure you'll never get a grant ever again. It's all about publish or perish, and data is easily fudged to come to whatever conclusion you're looking for. As Mark Twain once said: There are lies, damns lies and statistics.

I could go on and on, but suffice to say, science in practice is very different from science in theory. And anyone who works for the government in a field where it pays a lot more to work in the private sector, is most likely too stupid and inefficient to get and keep a job in a private corporation*cough* Fauci *cough*.

/end rant

[NYPat]

Yep. They all watched youtube videos and became critical thinkers.

[Travis99]

Humankind will be undone by our mistaken belief that we are much more intelligent than we actually are.

The more I read, the more I realize how little I actually understand. I call it the information paradox.

[Mr Beer]

Yeah those scientists claim the Earth rotates around the Sun but we need to keep questioning the science because thats how we progress.

[JayJ350]

The truth is that the majority of people in universities are not there because they are very smart, they are there because they do not like manual labor.

And I'm saying this as someone with multiple degrees and over 20 years of education, but I spent a lot of time tutoring other students, and the average stupidity is astounding. People don't even remember what they saw at the beginning of a trimester, and are horrified when the teacher/professor announces that the final exam will cover everything that was taught for the whole trimester. I have seen average grades of 30-40% in courses as easy as Calculus I, and even lower grades in tensor calculus (and we're talking about tensor calculus with a maximum of 2 indices, not with 4 indices as in general relativity). I've seen courses where more than 50% of the student didn't come even close to a passing grade.

Most of these people, even the ones with M Sc and PhDs, have no idea what science even is. They have no idea of the principles of intellectual rigor. Do you think that graduate students come up with a great idea for a study and then start working on it? The answer is no. You can go to the graduate area of a faculty and look at the boards with graduate studies opportunities, with the associated grants. The corporations subsidizing these studies EXPECT you to find that the null hypothesis is wrong, and if you find otherwise, you can be sure you'll never get a grant ever again. It's all about publish or perish, and data is easily fudged to come to whatever conclusion you're looking for. As Mark Twain once said: There are lies, damns lies and statistics.

I could go on and on, but suffice to say, science in practice is very different from science in theory. And anyone who works for the government in a field where it pays a lot more to work in the private sector, is most likely too stupid and inefficient to get and keep a job in a private corporation*cough* Fauci *cough*.

/end rant

School is not a place for smart people. Most inventive people, the true creators, were self-taught. That's the only way to really innovate, and you can't teach creativity and innovation, much like how you can't teach intelligence. Intelligence is something you are born with, a natural ability to make sense of things, organize information, and do stuff on your own.

The kind of people who are reliant upon academia and quotes to speak for them, they aren't intelligent, any educated idiot can do that, and educated idiots exist because you don't need to be smart to parrot things. Parrots are birds and birds are generally the dumbest creatures to exist, yet they can be excellent at repeating things people say. People in academia are literally bird brains.

[ezmac31]

Yeah those scientists claim the Earth rotates around the Sun but we need to keep questioning the science because thats how we progress.

Is this post intended to proclaim that the certainty of the efficacy of the vaccine = the certainty of the fact that the earth revolves around the sun?

Lmao you are a shill

[FatBallz]

Yeah those scientists claim the Earth rotates around the Sun but we need to keep questioning the science because thats how we progress.

Questioning the science means questioning the experts who say eggs are bad for you (or good for you... I can't remember what it is this year)

[Mr Beer]

Is this post intended to proclaim that the certainty of the efficacy of the vaccine = the certainty of the fact that the earth revolves around the sun?

Lmao you are a shill

Nah I'm saying that "qUeStIoN tHE sCiEncE" is the mantra of idiots who think watching a youtube video constitutes research that somehow trumps years of acquiring formal qualifications and working in the field.

Questioning the science means questioning the experts who say eggs are bad for you (or good for you... I can't remember what it is this year)

I don't believe there is scientific consensus on whether eggs are good for you or bad for you but I'd guess that most nutritionists would agree that like many foods, they form a perfectly acceptable part of a well balanced diet. Never eating eggs probably doesn't do anything for your health unless you have some weird allergy and consuming the bulk of your calories in the form of eggs is unlikely to be an optimal diet for most people.

One thing to bear in mind is that there is a vast difference between science and science journalism. Food is a particularly egregious example because diets occupy a lot of space in the media.

So you may see a million clickbait titles like "Eggs and your heart? Number two will frighten you!", but that in no way means that there is a scientific consensus on the topic. It also doesn't mean that science is somehow flip-flopping about eggs.

[numberguy12]

Science and the experimental method was barely a thing back in Aristotle’s day. He probably came to the conclusion of geocentrism based on feeling (doesn’t feel like earth is moving), everything moves downwards to earth, and the perceived absence of stellar parallax through the year....there are probably other reasons I’m forgetting (as a philosopher, he seemed to think of things in the “ought” sense a lot- X ought to do such and such, or ought to be such and such). I mean none of this is great science, or science at all. It certainly wasn’t established science in the day of Aristotle.

His views were gradually overturned for the correct model of heliocentrism, and that was an important component of the rise of science- to question sources of authority, and let the observations from experiment speak for themselves. One of my favorite mottos is that of the Royal Society: “Nullius in verba” (On the word of nobody).

Questioning is great in science. It can lead to new and interesting hypotheses. However I do not think it is productive to question clearly established science like whether the earth is flat or is the moon made of cheese vs rock. You “trusted the science” if you ever flew in an airplane. You trusted the concept from physics called lift, as well as all the complex inner workings of an airplane that need to function in order to fly you to your destination and not just fall out of the sky. I imagine you trusted this science (with your life), probably without understanding much of it, like anyone else. You also trusted science (for example Newton’s laws) if you ever drove down the highway at 60 mph, or took an antibiotic to wipe out an infection- you trusted that the pill would do X, and not, say, Y.

I don’t think we are one day going to discover electromagnetism is all bunk, as we are literally make use of these physics all the time in our communications.

That being said, while it is not productive to question basic established facts backed by mountains of evidence, it is not “against science” or whatever to question things like the impact of a new virus and various related items like mask wearing, vaccines, etc (these are complex things- the human body, viruses, disease). One man, be it Fauci or whoever, does not speak for science. The term “science” itself has been largely hijacked and politicized over the last year, it’s really unfortunate.

[Mr Beer]

Yeah maybe just ignore my post and read this twice instead, because this is what I was getting at but couldn't be bothered to type out properly.

Science and the experimental method was barely a thing back in Aristotle’s day. He probably came to the conclusion of geocentrism based on feeling (doesn’t feel like earth is moving), everything moves downwards to earth, and the perceived absence of stellar parallax through the year....there are probably other reasons I’m forgetting (as a philosopher, he seemed to think of things in the “ought” sense a lot- X ought to do such and such, or ought to be such and such). I mean none of this is great science, or science at all. It certainly wasn’t established science in the day of Aristotle.

His views were gradually overturned for the correct model of heliocentrism, and that was an important component of the rise of science- to question sources of authority, and let the observations from experiment speak for themselves. One of my favorite mottos is that of the Royal Society: “Nullius in verba” (On the word of nobody).

Questioning is great in science. It can lead to new and interesting hypotheses. However I do not think it is productive to question clearly established science like whether the earth is flat or is the moon made of cheese vs rock. You “trusted the science” if you ever flew in an airplane. You trusted the concept from physics called lift, as well as all the complex inner workings of an airplane that need to function in order to fly you to your destination and not just fall out of the sky. I imagine you trusted this science (with your life), probably without understanding much of it, like anyone else. You also trusted science (for example Newton’s laws) if you ever drove down the highway at 60 mph, or took an antibiotic to wipe out an infection- you trusted that the pill would do X, and not, say, Y.

I don’t think we are one day going to discover electromagnetism is all bunk, as we are literally make use of these physics all the time in our communications.

That being said, while it is not productive to question basic established facts backed by mountains of evidence, it is not “against science” or whatever to question things like the impact of a new virus and various related items like mask wearing, vaccines, etc (these are complex things- the human body, viruses, disease). One man, be it Fauci or whoever, does not speak for science. The term “science” itself has been largely hijacked and politicized over the last year, it’s really unfortunate.

[Travis99]

Nah I'm saying that "qUeStIoN tHE sCiEncE" is the mantra of idiots who think watching a youtube video constitutes research that somehow trumps years of acquiring formal qualifications and working in the field.



I don't believe there is scientific consensus on whether eggs are good for you or bad for you but I'd guess that most nutritionists would agree that like many foods, they form a perfectly acceptable part of a well balanced diet. Never eating eggs probably doesn't do anything for your health unless you have some weird allergy and consuming the bulk of your calories in the form of eggs is unlikely to be an optimal diet for most people.

One thing to bear in mind is that there is a vast difference between science and science journalism. Food is a particularly egregious example because diets occupy a lot of space in the media.

So you may see a million clickbait titles like "Eggs and your heart? Number two will frighten you!", but that in no way means that there is a scientific consensus on the topic. It also doesn't mean that science is somehow flip-flopping about eggs.

You have zero clue how little you know. If you knew you knew nothing, that would be something, but you don’t.

The irony in your sig is almost too much for me to bear.

[Mr Beer]

You have zero clue how little you know. If you knew you knew nothing. That would be something, but you don’t.

The irony in your sig is almost too much for me to bear.

The older I get, the more I'm aware that I know very little. There are a million topics under the sun and no-one can reasonably be an expert in many of them, let alone all of them. I know a good amount about my job, and poker, that's about all I'm an expert in. That said, I'm constantly astonished by just how stupid and ignorant other people can be and the self proclaimed science sceptics on this forum are one of most egregious examples I can think of.

[Judgment]

Can’t even remember the science on Pluto. Is it a planet or not?

[plsmire]

Yep. They all watched youtube videos and became critical thinkers.

Anti-vax Vids aren’t even allowed on YouTube. Only lefties can spill propaganda. So where is it exactly coming from?

Could it be from…logic?

[Skylinerd1]

[Jasonw1178]

When the science changes as it is convienent for politicians. When the scientist are being paid by the government. When they are caught in all out lies.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Perhaps the government and the medical establishment should question why people don't trust them.

[Weightaholic]

Never stop questioning the science brothers. Don't let the leftist agenda ridicule you for seeking truth.

There's a difference between being skeptical and just being selectively gullible.

[forthenoodz]

When the science changes as it is convienent for politicians. When the scientist are being paid by the government. When they are caught in all out lies.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Perhaps the government and the medical establishment should question why people don't trust them.

brb trust the science
brb women don't have as much genetic testosterone but are as strong as men!
brb trannys and gays aren't a mental illness and can propogate their genes

[krs128]

You progress by Questioning the Science.




Aristotl: Thought the earth was the center of the universe. Wrong

Galileo: Said the moon has nothing to do with the tides. Wrong

Newton: Sucked on mercury like it was nypat suking bidens cawk. Both Wrong!


At one time these men were the smartest people on the planet.






Never stop questioning the science brothers. Don't let the leftist agenda ridicule you for seeking truth.

Science is WRONG... some times. Making them and everyone around them a stupid bitch.

Liberals are trying to assassinate our character. We can't change their mind. I won't change my mind because I don't have to. Because I'm an American. I won't change my mind on anything, regardless of the facts that are set out before me. I'm dug in. And I'll never change.

[yeshli2nuts]

Unfortunately most of the people in America who "aren't trusting science" aren't actually using the scientific method to come to their conclusions, but instead are just going against whatever the mainstream view is because they don't trust the government or large scientific organizations. That's even worse. I would guess that 99% of those people don't even know what the scientific method is or even graduated high school.

[Lastrepbrah]

The more I read, the more I realize how little I actually understand. I call it the information paradox.

I agree with this. Reading more brings about a realization of how much knowledge is out there. Most of which one may never tap in to.

Recommend me some reads bruv

[OPGenesis]

My favorite is "settled science".

[Bushmaster]

Usually when they say "Trust the science," what they really mean is trust Fauci.. A lifelong government bureaucrat.

There's a difference between being skeptical and just being selectively gullible.

Enjoying your lockdown?