• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Whyt the public should mistrust science

The Mark said:
All this does not in any way support mistrust of science.

It supports mistrust of scientists... Because they're human, and thus inevitably subject to all the flaws humans can possess.

Besides that, much of the miscommunication/misinformation arises when the multiple layers and systems of reporting on scientific study results misunderstand or misrepresent said results for the purpose of getting clicks.
This is helped by scientists playing to such a market because they need funding.

We need to provide funding and watch in awe as scientists do studies which prove things wrong or come up with nothing at all.
Click to expand...

I will agree much of the problem comes from the press reporting, "Possible cure for Alzheimers has been thought to have been indicated in some preliminary research." Otherwise, parsing science and scientists is pointless.

One big difference is that scientists used to do the research, gather the data, and then generate the states. Now they can use computers which will tell them which data to include to get the results that they want. And, they do.
 
Patrickt said:
I will agree much of the problem comes from the press reporting, "Possible cure for Alzheimers has been thought to have been indicated in some preliminary research." Otherwise, parsing science and scientists is pointless.

One big difference is that scientists used to do the research, gather the data, and then generate the states. Now they can use computers which will tell them which data to include to get the results that they want. And, they do.
Click to expand...

Might there be a way to just have the raw data published on some online system? Then it could be pulled to analyze as needed by anyone interested in the study, based on how it was done, etc.

No money in that though, so probably won't happen...

Edit: And of course that doesn't address the problem of bad analysis.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
Nope.
Click to expand...

Ok, thank for your honesty! Much appreciated

However, what is this 'nope' telling you? I even take it there never even was one hint for that?!
( Of course not all alternatives are working, I am not saying that, but some certainly do.)


That 'science' is valuefree, open and honest, or that someone who pays this indoctrination doesn't want you and others too know?


What do you think?
 
Last edited:
Interesting no one reacted to this posting, so I shall put it up again:

Pin dÁr said:
well I am very skeptical of both!

let me explain: medcine is the THIRD cause of death in the usa.
Not very trustworthy, is it?

And 'law'? No people are 'under the law" because the 'law' is only here for corporations.

BUT, if you identify yourself as a corporation, you will be treated as one and them you are 'under the law"

A strawman for this is used, you letters in CAPITALS.

This in a nuttshell and I understand it is way too short too explain all this,

However, these are one of the reasons I don't trust any science.

Furthermore, 'science' is nething less then a 'belief-system'. called 'scientism"

and yes, most 'scientists' are dumbed down by the educa.. oeps indoctrination system
Click to expand...
 
trust.jpg
 
71XADYYG13L._AC_UL320_SR218,320_.gif
 
The Mark said:
All this does not in any way support mistrust of science.

It supports mistrust of scientists... Because they're human, and thus inevitably subject to all the flaws humans can possess.

Besides that, much of the miscommunication/misinformation arises when the multiple layers and systems of reporting on scientific study results misunderstand or misrepresent said results for the purpose of getting clicks.
This is helped by scientists playing to such a market because they need funding.

We need to provide funding and watch in awe as scientists do studies which prove things wrong or come up with nothing at all.
Click to expand...

I have to just say, this is a quality post. I also think you nailed the point about miscommunication. In my experience, I have read a new paper in a journal where the authors may claim "these results may support a potential role of in [disease] and, thus, may represent a future therapeutic target" and later that day, I will see a video on Facebook or a headline in an article from a newspaper "Scientists claim cure for [disease] is [X]" and it's a huge misconception by both the media (who misconstrue the data) and the public (who misunderstand the article).

Pin dÁr said:
Ok, thank for your honesty! Much appreciated

However, what is this 'nope' telling you? I even take it there never even was one hint for that?!
( Of course not all alternatives are working, I am not saying that, but some certainly do.)


That 'science' is valuefree, open and honest, or that someone who pays this indoctrination doesn't want you and others too know?


What do you think?
Click to expand...

I think your post doesn't make much sense and is not really rooted in reality given that, approximately 20 years ago, for example, cancer was a death sentence and people are now getting second chances in life where, previously, there were none. Am I to understand you really do not take any medications? Science. Received any vaccinations? Science. Gotten an x-ray, MRI, or CT scan? Science. Brushed your teeth? Science. Drank your tap water? Science. Gotten your eyes checked and received eyeglasses or contacts? Science. Eaten almost any food, recently? Science. Adhesives? Science. Solvents? Science. Computer? Science. Phone? Science. You can pretend you live in a bubble and that science is ruining your life when, in reality, if it weren't for science, you probably wouldn't even be here and, if you were, you presumably wouldn't have the life you live now.
 
zgoldsmith23 said:
I think your post doesn't make much sense and is not really rooted in reality given that,
Click to expand...

You may think whatever you like, however, this is your cognitive dissinance speaking.

given that, approximately 20 years ago, for example, cancer was a death sentence and people are now getting second chances in life where, previously, there were none. Am I to understand you really do not take any medications? Science. Received any vaccinations? Science. Gotten an x-ray, MRI, or CT scan? Science. Brushed your teeth? Science. Drank your tap water? Science. Gotten your eyes checked and received eyeglasses or contacts? Science. Eaten almost any food, recently? Science. Adhesives? Science. Solvents? Science. Computer? Science. Phone? Science. You can pretend you live in a bubble and that science is ruining your life when, in reality, if it weren't for science, you probably wouldn't even be here and, if you were, you presumably wouldn't have the life you live now.
Click to expand...

You assume in this part of your posting that all these things are here because of the so called 'modern science'. But nothing could be further from the truth.
You are here talking about 'Technology" and no, "technology' is not applied 'modern science'.Why is that you may ask?
Well, all these things were already or made or at least figured out in concept way way way before 'modern science'.
There is literally NOTHING here because of 'modern science' Hence my postings about scientist being payed by the taxpayer for doing their hobby.
They haven't brought anything to the world. NOT ONE THING!

But I bet you haven't researched this side, and took your indoctrination for granted.?
 
besides , as I have written before, 'science' insiders themselves are saying thye can't trust their own 'science' anymore!
 
How about science outsiders who take advertisers fake claims and call it science?
 
katzgar said:
more right wing anti education
Click to expand...

what on earth does that has to do with anything???


I am not anti-education, I am anti indoctrination.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom