It is, I agree. It's convenient in that I'm not subject as readily to propaganda which relies on repetition bias to lead me to believe something. And it means also I save the effort of having to replicate experiments and data when the entire industry and practice of science has lost its luster of credibility entirely through its own fault and special interests.
If you didn't do the experiment yourself and replicate the results, the average case should be you dismiss the outcome as a lie, because this saves you from being fooled. The best case is saving yourself the trouble and assuming the science is propaganda that is outright untrue at worse, or misleading at best, and then wait for more replication results.
Or have you forgotten the p-hacking scandal of only a few years ago?
Very rational.
Hyper rational even.
Everything in reality is not a lie.
But much information is useless, and much more actively contradictory or misleading.
Scientists do not lie in the way you are suggesting.
For someone so rational you seem very comfortable making statements so broad as to evince your own omniscience.
They do not make up false data. Maybe a handful do.
Are you so sure?
They do not just make up false haplogroups
Are you so sure?
because the experiment can be repeated and they would be exposed.
I invite you to peruse the literature and news of many such scandals, at your own leisure.
You do not understand the nature of the corruption in scientific circles.
prototype 0 points 2 days ago
It is, I agree. It's convenient in that I'm not subject as readily to propaganda which
relies on repetition bias to lead me to believe something.
And it means also I save the effort of having to replicate experiments and data
when the entire industry and practice of science has lost its luster of credibility
entirely through its own fault and special interests.
If you didn't do the experiment yourself and replicate the results, the average case should be you dismiss the outcome as a lie, because this saves you from being fooled.
The best case is saving yourself the trouble and assuming the science is propaganda that is outright untrue at worse, or misleading at best, and then wait for more replication results.
Or have you forgotten the p-hacking scandal of only a few years ago?
Hyper rational even.
But much information is useless, and much more actively contradictory or misleading.
For someone so rational you seem very comfortable making statements so broad as to evince your own omniscience.
Are you so sure?
Are you so sure?
I invite you to peruse the literature and news of many such scandals, at your own leisure.
Are you so sure?