/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15958525
Not watching that lmao, calling widespread international academic fraud a mere 'replication crisis' is essentially fraud itself.

>>15958532
I only call it replication crisis for brevity. I know its widespread. That highlights the necessity of this issue to be resolved. The scientific method lead to great discovery during the 20th century, and its still used successfully today. But is the sheer amount of falsified data worth it? I'm hoping the conversation takes a turn towards the process of reviews.

>>15958583
Why are you bringing up the "scientific method" as though it has any bearing whatsoever on fraud, ideologically motivated fiction, lies and negligence?

What do you want me to tell you? That the third world needs to be barred from all research and publication? That private parties must be hired to verify all experimentation? There is no good solution to intentional bad actors being allowed to operate within any system.

>>15958525
>misapplying the method
its ignored entirely in favor of peer review (AKA collusion)

>>15958525
Problems and solutions are created by the same entity.

>>15958525
The scientific method is just a meme, it doesn't exist in IRL. They teach children about this supposedly perfect method as a means of brainwashing them into trusting the so-called scientist who never follow the meme method.
They do the same thing with the idea of journalistic ethics, children are taught that journalists never lie in order to trick them into believing journalists' lies

>>15960897
>The scientific method is just a meme
brainlet cope

>>15960899
nobody abides by those rules in irl, you are the one coping. you're too proud to admit you were tricked into believing in a happy idealistic fantasy which does not exist in reality and until you realize that all you can do is cope

>>15961489
>nobody abides by those rules in irl
NTA but this is so unbelievably ignorant that you're probably being low IQ on purpose so I'll explain for the audience.

When do we say a statement (hypothesis) is true (validity)? A statement is true or false relative (testing) to an observer, another statement and / or sensory impression. This may seem arbitrary at first because the truth value of any statement needs to be supported by the truth value of another statement as the result of asking why ad infinitum. Yet from any premise the truth value of a statement can be determined as the degree to which a statement consistently relates to other statements derrived from that premise. A network of consistently (reliability, replicability) relating statements is a frame of reference (scientific theory). Any statement can be true relative to one frame of reference and false relative to another frame of reference. For example: it is true and false that red can be painted with blue. Yet science, technology, politics, media and all human activities demonstrate that some frames of reference are prioritized over other frames of reference. In other words: humans attribute more value to one frame of reference than to another.

1/2

>>15961531
So you're applying the scientific method of validity, reliability and replicability in your daily speech. We point our finger to a thing and agree on the axiom that such a thing is called a cat and what properties define a cat. It could be called a neko if you like that symbol more but after that we're going to be consistent about it. When we encounter another thing we're going to compare it to our definition of cat: other thing says woof but cats only say meow therefore it is not a cat. The definition of cat can also be used to make predictions: if this thing is a cat, then we expect such and so behaviour. For example: we predict cats hunt birds therefore we give a bell to cats to alert birds. We're all methodical like that. We have a model/theory of the house we live in that we test all the time: if I walk over there and turn this knob clean water comes out.

2/2

according to https://www.writingtoiq.com this post >>15961531 is 114 IQ and this post >>15961533 is 100 IQ, so you are the one with low IQ

>>15958525
>Is it time for a new iteration of the Scientific Method?
It works fine, it's just not being used.

>>15962903
>meme website tells me how to think
>claims he isn't low IQ, but doesn't even capitalize his sentences like an anti-intellectual effeminate hipster

>>15958525
the scientific method is not the problem, the problem is the use of hegel's "scientific" method

>>15962903
Stop lying, refute the content of my argument or concede.

peer review and the publishing system is intentionally broken

>>15958525
science as a method would work fine without institutions, especially ones that are ultimately about making money.

>>15963783
lol u were so butthurt about your low iq score that you edited out the lowest iq segment to engineer a better score

>>15963790
"peer review" is just another way of saying "collusion"
that system was born broken

>>15965969
>that system was born broken
as intended

>>15965969
goes all the way back to the royal society

>>15960899
Idiot doesn't even realize In his first breath he acted like the method doesn't work at all, then in the next he immediately just admits people aren't actually following the method, so he has have no idea if it is effective.

>>15962903
Are they training you shills to only post 10-20 word replies so they can't be plugged into that website or is that just all you can think in any single post?

>>15965969
Peer review is the exact opposite of collusion since it is suppose to mean you have to open up all your data to everyone in the public instead of just in your institution and its collaborators so that anyone can validate your claims and critique your theory instead of just the people who stand to benefit from your claims.

>>15969543
>anyone can validate your claims and critique your theory
Isn't peer-review completely non-transparent process, made by few anonymous nobodies, instead of everybody in the community anonymous or otherwise?

>>15968560
nope

>>15960897
You're supposed to be dead Paul

The scientific method is literally ‘fuck around, find out’, so what could you possibly replace it with, when anything you do at all is fucking around and finding out?

There is no substitute for science; things are just becoming more dense, sophisticated and nuanced.

>>15960897
the hippocratic oath is another meme thats circulated on tv and in school as a means of tricking naïve young people into trusting the soience. doctors have never abided by any such oath

>>15971847
This is true. Maybe science is kill.

>>15958525
I have a better method
>live comfy live
>new information pops up
>ask yourself: does it spark joy?
>if so, keep it
>if not, discard it
Example:
>Cats can recognise their name, but often choose to ignore their owner's call
Made me smile, so I keep it.
>Global warming
Doesn't spark joy. In fact, it means I should fly less, eat less meat etc. and/or face the horrors ahead of us. No thanks. Discarded.

>>15971847
Where does funding come in this model?

>>15973948
That's why they spin everything as beneficial for you: enjoy vegan health, enjoy convenience of 15-minute cities etc. Why don't you fall for that? Conversely: if you're only going to maximize your joy you need more dictatorship to do what I enjoy.

>>15971847
it isn't, you're ignorant. if you've never read francis bacon's work then you'll never be more than a poser

>>15974016
>enjoy convenience of 15-minute cities etc
What is wrong with 15-minute cities?

>>15975482
Drive around to any main street in a city in the last 60 years. You will see what is wrong.
This is true in both the highly successful cities and the failed one. Take the fortunate walkable cities of yesteryear have turned into crime ridden shitholes. And for the others, which couldn't sustain whatever boom that prompted them, they are ghost downs and boarded up.
The concept is a complete disaster in both directions. And for the same reason. The good people that make a community vanish and leave it to the elements (and the non-whites.)

>>15975614
permanently locking urbanites away into urban work gulags is a good idea

>>15962923
>doesn't even capitalize his sentences like an anti-intellectual effeminate hipster
Lack of capitalization is referred to as "trannycase" these days, please try to keep up with the jargon.

>>15958532
>calling widespread international academic fraud a mere 'replication crisis' is essentially fraud itself
this
also the thumbnail displays a negro and that identifies the video as not worth watching.

>>15975614
>Drive around to any main street in a city in the last 60 years.
Why yes, I know these terrible post-war cities with 6-lane roads running through the centre. It's terrible to walk there. But 15-minute cities aren't about main roads, they're about reaching a bakery, a doctor, a barber, a butcher, a school etc. in 15 minutes. Imagine not having to drive a car to do everyday things. Again, what's bad about that?

>>15978950
you don't shop at a local bakery, you get all of your baked goods from a supermarket and they're produced at a large centralized factory somewhere thats not within a 15 minute walk of you, you don't shot at a butcher shop either and you don't go to a doctor thats within less than a mile walk either. why are you using 1920s memes to justify your imaginary idea of a futuristic city?

>>15971328
this

>>15968560
the royal society was set up for irrefutable public demonstrations of scientific concepts, not for collusive peer review back slapping.

>>15980149
>you don't shop at a local bakery, you get all of your baked goods from a supermarket
Thanks to living in a town where everything is reachable in 15 minutes, I do get my bread from a bakery. I know, it's hard to imagine. I can walk to a place where they turn flour into bread. I don't need a car. Somehow, this is bad according to /pol/cels.
>you don't go to a doctor thats within less than a mile walk
??? What do you think I do? I drive an hour to see a doctor?

>>15981061
>everything is about politics
>>>/pol/

>>15958525
>make agenda
>test
>if test supports agenda, publish results get funding
>if not, work at mcdonalds

>>15982309
everything is about politics if you're a political activist posing as a scientist

>>15982309
Yes, and it will get even more overbearing at this rate.

>>15982352
Thats the soiyentific method

>>15958532
>calling widespread international academic fraud a mere 'replication crisis' is essentially fraud itself.
FPBP

>>15958532
Thats neurolinguistic programming, same as renaming "genital mutilation" as circumcision to make the practice seem like its not harmful misandrististic

>>15986628
tsmt

>>15969543
>Peer review is the exact same thing as collusion

>>15989850
Safeguarding scientific integrity: A case study in examining manipulation in the peer review process
https://www.informahealthcare.com/doi/full/10.1080/08989621.2023.2292043

>study details episodes of collusion and conflicts of interest in the scientific peer review process

>>15990937
contemporary scientists are right up there with lawyers and politicians on the scale of honesty

>>15958525
>Is it time for a new iteration of the Scientific Method?

No.
In the "replication crisis" the main issue is thet they do not even attempt using the scientific method.

Meaning:
>experiments with no control or adequate control for every factor they additionally introduce in the experiment
>not making any experiment
>only observe data, make up "exclusion criteria" based on nothing
>hiding the raw data
>Exclusion methods picked by "which adjacent attribute can we exclude, to make our data fulfull the hypothesis" aka "p-hacking"
>Meta studies of meta studies of reviews of essays
>meta studies are the big short" like bundeling of studies so that is inpossible to verify validity.

>meta analysis based on over 50 studies
>of which 40 are not studies but also meta analysis or just science maganzine press releases which briefly mention a study related to the topic or non related studies which tangentially touch the subject of the meta anylisis
>and the other 10 are either surveys or based on n<20 study subjects
>never show homogenicity of studies
>conceal heterogenicity of studies

Meta studies are the Mortgage-backed security of science.

>>15991908
>In the "replication crisis" the main issue is thet they do not even attempt using the scientific method.
They use confirmation bias or just outright lying instead, why isn't that just as good?

>>15991851
and used car salesmen
and whores
and jews

>>15958525
>fatty
I can skip this without feeling like I've missed something of value. A fatty will never say anything truly worthwhile.

>>15958525
>Is it time for a new iteration of the Scientific Method?
no

>>15995540
The original is timeless and perfect, the problem these days is it is routinely ignored by people why still insist on using the title "scientist"

>>15996056
yeah its weird that the people who name themselves after the scientific method are the same people who abhor the scientific method the most

>>15997037
Scientists wear the skin of the scientific method they murdered like its a war trophy

>>15997037

>>15999008
Its funny because its true

>>15969538
it can't be effective if its never adhered to