• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    111 months ago

    You know companies that pursue scientific pursuits outside of academia still publish their work. They also tend to hire people with masters and doctorates from well-regarded academic institutions.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      111 months ago

      Call it the Game, call it the science Meta, call it politics in the sciences, whatever you like. It’s an extension of the same fundamentalist principles. Whatever it is, isn’t science itself.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        111 months ago

        Whatever it is, isn’t science itself

        But it is. More science than you’ve ever done it seems since you think one data point with no controls is somehow scientific.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          111 months ago

          That’s asinine. The bureaucracy and politics surrounding the practice of science is explicitly not science itself. It is crucial to a career in in modern science sure, but it is not itself science.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Peer-review is an incredibly important part of science, one of the most important in fact. So go ahead with your non-peer reviewed, no control “science”, and leave the real science to us scientists.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              011 months ago

              Scientific consensus is determined by peer-review. Peer -reviewed consensus can, and has been down to be false.

              Absolute certainty still isn’t part of science. If it’s 100% certain and not falsifiable, it’s not science by definition. Just like an atom with 7 protons isn’t carbon, by definition. Nitrogen is an important and valid element, but it isn’t carbon.