Sign into an existing account

You know this consensus science is totally wrapped up in the holocaust. All the scientists say it happened and they have a ton of "evidence" like all those shoes. Lol. No proof. No real science--just consensus. AND YOU BETTER AGREE!

So the consensus is the earth is a globe spinning at 1000 mph approximately, while wobbling for change of seasons.. it is flying around the sun at 67 thousand miles per hour... everything is flying through the universe at ungodly speeds.

At the same time another globe is spinning around the first globe from 237k miles away and spins at the perfect speed to always face the first globe

This is the consensus and if you dare mention flat earth or scientific method to test flat earth their is a weird group of shill that brigade attack using jdif type tactics

Weird

Back in 2003, huh?

Well, unfortunately, it wasn't stopped cold in its tracks. It has completely permeated not only the way science is presented in the media but also the scientific institutions themselves.

Scientists and engineers who question "the consensus" are swiftly ostracized, defunded and removed from "the scientific community". This is a complete disaster, because this is no longer science, and no meaningful scientific progress is possible this way. What is presented as "science" is now driven entirely by politics and greed, not facts and evidence. It is a cult of sorts, and the younger generations entering the field are being thoroughly indoctrinated into it.

We are at the beginning of a new dark age. Where superstitions reign supreme, with unhinged doomsayers as our prophets.

Most of the published science nowadays is not reproducible due to a ton of different reasons.

Science is observation.

Im not sure you can have scientific method without some level of scientific consensus. You need some sort of null hypothesis —e.g. “Newtonian physics is how the universe works” and then you must gather new data or evidence and analyze the null hypothesis in the context of the data to verify its correctness or show that it is inadequate (e.g. “Relativity and quantum physics are a thing.”)

This is sometimes expressed as a bayesian probability P(H|E) = [P(E|H) x P(H)] /P(E) where E is new evidence and H is the “consensus”: a widely accepted model

I think. Its been awhile. But this is probably how a mathemetician would define scientific method.

The problem that some people dont understand is that the consensus is temporary. The widely accepted models that we have for reality are imperfect and must be continually refined and sometimes massively revised. Earlier models are always being overthrown.

The scientific establishment is a corrupt human institution controlled by priests in the service of government, or some other power elite. There should be no presumption of objectivity there, as Galileo could tell us, or that guy they drowned over the square root of 2. Covid was a great reminder of this, with everybody slavishly worshipping “The Fauci”.

I find it interesting that some people can be very objective in some areas of inquiry but zealously stubborn in others. Everybody has a sacred cow. The brain is not a rational machine.

I'm surprised he wasn't canceled for this.

There IS a consensus that Queeri should neck himself

PDF link to the speech:

https://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/Crichton2003.pdf

Well worth the time, IMHO.

Do they even teach proofs in math any more? That's closely related to what we're talking about and really a pure form of science.