• UmeU@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    7 days ago

    If all scientific knowledge were to suddenly disappear and we were to start from square one, it would all reappear exactly like it is. We would rediscover gravity, evolution, the expansion of the universe, etc.

    Just because some scientific research is funded by entities with a bias, does not mean that the process of science is corrupted.

    Often times the results of the research funded by biased corporations and institutions results in discovery that is contrary to the goal of the entity and so they just stop funding it. Sometimes they actively try to bury the discoveries, however the process of science will ensure that the truth comes to light eventually.

    This meme has a poor understanding of science.

    • blackris@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      The process of science is not corrupted but deeply flawed. It is like that, because we as a species are as well. Science is the best method we have to create secured knowledge, but it is far from perfect. Things like predatory journals, lazy to non existing peer reviews in established publications, reports about scientists who are under pressure to create positive results even if their research had none of those etc. show us that .

      Capitalism plays a big part in this problem. To plainly reject that is simply naive.

      • UmeU@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        The only thing that can correct bad science is good science.

        That’s the great thing about the scientific method, as soon as someone presents a flawed hypothesis which is then subjected to scrutiny, good science has the opportunity to shine a light on the mistakes.

        The process of science is not deeply flawed. Just because capitalism does indeed incentivize some to stray away from the scientific method does not then make science itself flawed.

        You are throwing the baby out with the bath water.

        Capitalism is a big problem, but to say that the scientific method is deeply flawed because of capitalism is not correct.

        • blackris@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          We seem to be talking about different things here: science and the scientific method. Science is a process involving many different institutions and individuals with their personal worldviews, problems and interests. The state of the scientific method is a whole other discussion, I am not able to lead.

          • UmeU@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            The process of science is called the scientific method.

            There certainly are people who call what they do ‘science’, but if they aren’t using the method, they are not doing science properly.

  • ekZepp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    Someone is confusing true science and “Scientists says…” bullshit clickbait titles online.

  • stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    7 days ago

    Science is a method of systematically finding out the what, the how, the when and the why of the world.

    Science itself has no answers, but has the questions that will lead to the answers that are the most accurate we can manage.

  • cheesymoonshadow@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    8 days ago

    Reminds me of how some people got a bunch of fake research papers published to prove how flawed the system is. And they would have gotten still more published but the WSJ caught on and they were exposed.

    • ashok36@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      8 days ago

      I would highly highly doubt it. He’s just the “science man” of memes so he’s used as a stand in for all scientists, or at least science communicators.