#science

@SirHendrick Not entirely accurate... Doing rigorous experimentation under peer review to refute and/or confirm scientific assertions is how you do science.. Simply questioning the available scientific data and studies without actually doing the rigorous experimentation is **not** how you do science.

@freemo The way you do science is you make an educated guess (hypothesis), you test it in some way (experimentation), and then you update your views based on the outcome of your experiment. The peer review step is extraneous and is basically just there as part of a step to convince other people that you’re not full of shit.

Unfortunately for academic scientists, this peer review system isn’t inspiring a lot of confidence in the general population.

@SirHendrick

@NEETzsche

We care about what works, not what people who have no understanding of science think of the system.

@SirHendrick

@freemo >We care about what works, not what people who have no understanding of science think of the system.

Apparently you do think what genpop thinks of the system because you’re trying to get genpop to act on its findings, freaking out in the news media and in government when they blow those findings off. Like I said, academic scientists lost a lot of credibility in the last decade and your hoity toity appeal to your own authority won’t save you from that loss of credibility. In fact, it contributes to it.

t. someone who did published research in a university

@SirHendrick @LukeAlmighty