Comments
|
The issue people have with "science" isn't the process of accumulating knowledge it's mostly in how "science" by large labs is presented as fact and people are asked to turn against their own intuition to believe unproven and poorly vetted "sciences." You look into the trusted science of our age and you'll see a lot of inconsistency, statistics per capita are presented as raw numbers for instance "population A did blank 100,000 times this year and population B did blank only 50,000. There's seriously a problem with population A, here's a regulation and how we're going to push it into the lives of every day citizens." -presented by conflict of interest institution 1, in collaboration with conflict of interest group 2 Except population B made up 10% of the surveyed crowd and population A makes up 90% "Oh you see the exact opposite of what we are cramming down your throat with biased and poorly controlled studies? Well that's your anecdotal experience and you're an idiot" except the methodology is a lie and is misrepresented. I know I'm ranting, but this happens day in and day out, so much "mainstream" science is subject to this and it just turns people off of the whole subject, gives the impression "If someone in a lab-coat tells me something, they're just lying and trying to sell me something" which is typically the case. "This science means we take your taxes and give them here instead of what you know to be true, and this science means we take your kid away because we've abstracted that into psychological abuse, the science we conducted in extreme bias with crazy profit incentive proves it!" It's a nasty perversion of the research and discovery I always dreamed of participating in as a kid. |
Report