|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jun 22, 2017 17:58:22 GMT
I'm really curious how this whole "gangster science" thing operates in your mind. Do all the world's scientists get together like the Legion of Doom and decide on what agenda they're going to push that week/year/decade and then go about pushing it primarily in little-read peer-reviewed journals that are almost solely read by others in their field in the hopes that they might get lucky and get featured in the news media? Well now, I would think it works like this. They get paid rather good money to produce results that jibe with conclusions that have already been reached, and if they don't do that, their funding gets cut off, and they will have to find some other kind of occupation, like flipping burgers in a fast food joint, or something like that. So do you think ALL science works like this--meaning that all science is just paid for by outsiders who want them to produce certain results--or just some science? And if it's just some science, then how do you distinguish between the "gangster" variety and the "real" variety? Further, in the gangster variety, how do you suppose they're able to maintain this on a global scale, being able to pay and convince almost all scientists (and all publications) in a field to produce the same results and preventing any others in the field from producing contradicting results? Seems like it require a massive amount of money and keeping everyone quiet about it, and I think with the latter you overestimate how likely it is for that many people to keep quiet. |
|
