- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: "I Went to the Hospital with chest pains. The reality in the ER was interesting..."
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:40 pm to Azkiger
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:40 pm to Azkiger
Look at the date. China had already been welding apartment doors shut of infected people when this tweet went out. Scientists….Political Scientists.
0
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:40 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
If you apply that same mindset to business,
"Business" haven't been working overtime to force people to take a shot that might kill them, nor have they been trying to destroy the lives of people who don't want to buy their product.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:41 pm to Flats
quote:
Your link certainly does, but I think you have tunnel vision. Most scientific fields aren't political at all, because physics doesn't care about your views on welfare. It's only when "social" gets injected into science that leftist politics tends to control the narrative.
Hard sciences are less political than social sciences, but pandemics are both biological and social phenomena. Who gets sick has social and biological causes. Likewise, who gets better. Things like who gets treatment are more social than biological. Social issues involve power and justice and politics, so studying aspects of mankind with science is always going to get political. I don't think you can get around that.
This post was edited on 1/19/23 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:42 pm to TigerDoc
Would you trust someone who said that Richard Levine (see picture) was a woman and was capable of menstruation?
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:43 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
Hard sciences are less political than social sciences,
Thank you for admitting that in 2023 so-called "Hard Science" has been compromised.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:44 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
so studying aspects of mankind with science is always going to get political.
Which is exactly why skepticism is appropriate. Science plus politics isn't science, it's something else.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:46 pm to oogabooga68
It's a fantasy to imagine a completely depoliticized science. As far as science of gender, I'm going to plead to not knowing enough about the evidence on the subject to have a public opinion.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:49 pm to Flats
quote:
Which is exactly why skepticism is appropriate
Exactly.
Yet people's lives were absolutely destroyed for being skeptical.
It wasn't just limited to us "simpletons", some very accredited people who were previously thought to be experts in their fields were destroyed by the Fascists.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:49 pm to Flats
quote:
Which is exactly why skepticism is appropriate. Science plus politics isn't science, it's something else.
I think it's fair to try to come up with a higher-level concept to apply to science in the context of broader society. I'm sure something like this has been theorized by Feyerabend or some other modern philosopher of science/politics.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:50 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
As far as science of gender, I'm going to plead to not knowing enough about the evidence on the subject to have a public opinion.
Let me help you: If you think THIS is a man:
Then you are a gdamned idiot, liar or both.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:51 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
As far as science of gender, I'm going to plead to not knowing enough about the evidence on the subject to have a public opinion.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:52 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
It's a fantasy to imagine a completely depoliticized science.
Then it's fantasy to imagine people simply taking Scientists at their word "Because I'm a Scientist and I said so..."
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:54 pm to TigerDoc
really? You spout "science" but won't touch the subject?
How much scientific credibility do you have when you can't admit the gender stuff is a total social fabrication?
I am a scientist of physical measurement.
it would be like me saying gravity usually works this way, unless it identifies as wind, then....
Good Lord!
How much scientific credibility do you have when you can't admit the gender stuff is a total social fabrication?
I am a scientist of physical measurement.
it would be like me saying gravity usually works this way, unless it identifies as wind, then....
Good Lord!
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:56 pm to oogabooga68
I think it would be wrong to do that too. Flats' posts get at a way to think about about grounding trust that I generally agree with.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:57 pm to dr
quote:
How much scientific credibility do you have when you can't admit the gender stuff is a total social fabrication?
Yup.
He's arguing breathlessly that the peasants and simpletons should completely TRUST the Scientific Community, then when given a chance to earn that trust, pisses it away out of cowardice.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 12:58 pm to dr
quote:
really? You spout "science" but won't touch the subject?
Here's an important point. There's good spouting science and bad spouting science (actually a lot of the latter) and one bad way to spout science is claim scientific authority about subjects where you don't have the evidence or relevant expertise to interpret it or don't have a good sense of the structure of the epistemic community that's creating the knowledge.
This post was edited on 1/19/23 at 12:59 pm
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:01 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
about grounding trust that I generally agree with.
Then perhaps you should talk to some of your co-conspirators (sorry, couldn't resist
) about the ONLY consensus that the Scientific Community should be concerned with: A consensus of Scientists who understand that a huge fking Mea Culpa is owed the citizens of the World who were lied to.
A promise from all decent members of the Community to reject the Politics and money that perverted the Sciences.
An apology to all the Scientists who questioned the Narrative and were destroyed.
A promise to NEVER AGAIN engage in or endorse in any witch-hunts of those who question.
Maybe if the Scientific Community would engage THAT sort of consensus, it would start to heal.
UNTIL that time, most of us will consider the "expert class" to be dead.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:01 pm to oogabooga68
Agreed, let people see the data, explain your results, and don't F'g lie to push an agenda!!!
as a real scientist, in a real lab, doing real experiments
we measure, evaluate,
and if needed say:
"that was a flawed experiment", "that experiment failed" "that experiment yielded unexpected results",
no "group think for the right answer" the resulting data speaks for it's self
the scientific method requires that, and works when not cheated
as a real scientist, in a real lab, doing real experiments
we measure, evaluate,
and if needed say:
"that was a flawed experiment", "that experiment failed" "that experiment yielded unexpected results",
no "group think for the right answer" the resulting data speaks for it's self
the scientific method requires that, and works when not cheated
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:02 pm to oogabooga68
quote:
then when given a chance to earn that trust, pisses it away out of cowardice.
It increases my own level of confidence in a scientist when they don't try to speak authoritatively on a subject where they're not a relevant expert. I tend to be wary of gurus who speak authoritatively in too many fields.
Posted on 1/19/23 at 1:04 pm to TigerDoc
quote:
Here's an important point. There's good spouting science and bad spouting science (actually a lot of the latter) and one bad way to spout science is claim scientific authority about subjects where you don't have the evidence or relevant expertise to interpret it or don't have a good sense of the structure of the epistemic community that's creating the knowledge.
A lot of words when you could have simply said "I am a coward and a liar".
There is no "Science", I asked you if he was a Man or Woman.
There is only one right answer, HE is a MAN.
If you can't truthfully answer the simplest of questions, why should we listen to anything you have to say?
The question isn't a test of your KNOWLEDGE it's a test of your INTEGRITY and you failed.
Page 13 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News