|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jun 22, 2017 18:56:09 GMT
Yes, it's much better to get your information about science from Youtube videos made by lunatics than from actual scientists, oh excuse me..."so-called scientists" who just happen to have doctorate degrees in their chosen fields. Now that fuckwit you to whom you just replied can return and show once again that he's too fucking ignorant to know that he has no clue what an appeal to authority fallacy actually is. Like you and Blade he just makes up bullshit because he's read someone else use the terminology and thinks he can con people into thinking he knows what the fuck he's talking about. Then I suppose you had better put your faith in them. If they have doctorate degrees, they can't be wrong, and they are incapable of lying, yes?  They can be wrong. The entire purpose of peer-review is so that multiple experts in the same field can critique studies to see if they are wrong; and the entire scientific method is set up so that if even if/when most (if not all) of them are wrong they can be disproven by better evidence/experiments/studies. Even a brief review of the history of scientific advancement in any field--the way General Relativity supplanted Newtonian mechanics, eg.--is proof of that. It would also seem to be strong evidence against the notion of "gangster science," since if "gangster science" was really a thing then there shouldn't be disagreements and paradigm-shifting studies produced at all, no advancements, no changes of mind. |
|
