Lol "science denier." Science is based on disproving models and whenever anybody independent-minded enough comes along and starts picking away at sacred cows they get ganged up on. It's traditional
in fact those called science-deniers are the real scientists - they continuously ask questions, like it used to be in science! All those that are stuck in their study books do scientismTM
I've been reading geology (again) and it's always amusing to contemplate how fiercely creationism was defended fewer than 100 years ago. I mean, they just *demonized* those guys.
There are still a lot of people who insist the Earth is magnitudes younger than current geological assessments. It's hard to take humans too seriously, as a class
This winter I subscribed to Unbekoming and Agent131711, who both present unusual views on everything. At first a bit startled, but little by little, more interested in how we have been told bucket loads of lies. From what I learned in school 60 years ago, at least 95% were lies (although the teacher probably did not realize this). At least we had a history teacher for 2 years who was only interested in art - from her I still carry the wonder for old buildings and pottery, stuff that IS and is not 'theorized'.
I think one of the most important steps in the evolution of thought is to learn to question one’s own socially instilled assumptions. Most people don’t do this, and it shows
“it’s not what you don’t know, it’s what you know that just ain’t so”
In my younger days, continental drift was still considered Wegener's wacky fringe theory. I got to watch in real time as it became accepted as plate tectonics.
Not long ago, there was another study which found microplastics in pre-industrial era lake sediments; they hypothesized it was due to diffusion (lake sediment stratigraphy has always been somewhat suspicious because the stuff is often quite soft), but perhaps we need to suspect everything that can be suspected.
Research is overrated, and the ability to analyze published studies for biases and other errors underrated. You get stuff like sneaky rocks makin’ plastics down there on the lowdown
It works the other way around: out of thousands of various studies, those that are certain in their outrageous conclusions spread the best on the interwebs.
It's the Quantum Theory of Microplastics: the observer affects the observation.
This also works for assessing insect diversity, just spray the whole tree with pesticides
It’s still good one can say this and not be called “science denier” or worse
Lol "science denier." Science is based on disproving models and whenever anybody independent-minded enough comes along and starts picking away at sacred cows they get ganged up on. It's traditional
in fact those called science-deniers are the real scientists - they continuously ask questions, like it used to be in science! All those that are stuck in their study books do scientismTM
I've been reading geology (again) and it's always amusing to contemplate how fiercely creationism was defended fewer than 100 years ago. I mean, they just *demonized* those guys.
There are still a lot of people who insist the Earth is magnitudes younger than current geological assessments. It's hard to take humans too seriously, as a class
This winter I subscribed to Unbekoming and Agent131711, who both present unusual views on everything. At first a bit startled, but little by little, more interested in how we have been told bucket loads of lies. From what I learned in school 60 years ago, at least 95% were lies (although the teacher probably did not realize this). At least we had a history teacher for 2 years who was only interested in art - from her I still carry the wonder for old buildings and pottery, stuff that IS and is not 'theorized'.
I think one of the most important steps in the evolution of thought is to learn to question one’s own socially instilled assumptions. Most people don’t do this, and it shows
“it’s not what you don’t know, it’s what you know that just ain’t so”
In my younger days, continental drift was still considered Wegener's wacky fringe theory. I got to watch in real time as it became accepted as plate tectonics.
Oh, and I did see that article the other day and rolled my eyes. It took them this long to think about sample contamination? Seriously?
Not long ago, there was another study which found microplastics in pre-industrial era lake sediments; they hypothesized it was due to diffusion (lake sediment stratigraphy has always been somewhat suspicious because the stuff is often quite soft), but perhaps we need to suspect everything that can be suspected.
'we need to suspect everything that can be suspected'
Always.
You'd think these people had never read Agatha Christie. Or Richard Feynman.
Research is overrated, and the ability to analyze published studies for biases and other errors underrated. You get stuff like sneaky rocks makin’ plastics down there on the lowdown
If they've been wrong, it would be great news.
If only there was a PCR test for these little devils
[edited] It kinda makes me wonder how they were so certain microplastics are in every man's seminal fluids...
It must have been a ‘hands on’ endeavor.
It works the other way around: out of thousands of various studies, those that are certain in their outrageous conclusions spread the best on the interwebs.
I know, right? And here I am with my UFO decorations still up.
you might as well leave it all up, since it is changing too fast to re-decorate each time.