I do love that flat earth documentary where the guy eventually proved the Earth is a sphere.
It goes further than that.
Sargent says something along the lines of, “We can’t tell people about this result. They’ll kill us.”
The entire film sets up the premise that NASA is hiding research about a flat earth. They are guarding the ice wall so people don’t see it.
Then they hide research showing the earth is round.
These people don’t care about science. They care about power.
It’s no accident that conspiracy theorists and conservatives have a considerable overlap.
I’m incredibly high and cannot handle this 😂
Perfect time to watch it.
My cynicism is so automatic that I could never say what you just said and keep a straight face.
I’m saving this and I’m going to use it so much
Save yourself if you wish. They’ll say “well that just means that the peer-reviewed articles are in on it, too”. 🤦♂️
“Sure”
Can’t argue with facts……. is a quaint old saying that used to not be rhetorical
Nick Kroll? 😍
Dude. I completely forgot that Cillian Murphy was in Inception with DiCaprio!
This post came back for you…to remind you of something you once knew…
That this meme is not real
Yeah, but i heard that if you die in a meme you die in real life
The body cannot survive without the meme
I can already hear the meme train. Hop in or live long enough to die on the tracks.
BTW: What if the train is my totem?
This could backfire so horribly when they take that as permission to let all their crazy out.
I’ve never seen a published paper on how to make meth. I gotta get that info from Bill, and his parents were siblings.
You must not have looked very thoroughly.
Here’s one which compares multiple synthetic routes and their impurity profiles: https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.fsisyn.2020.06.004
To underline the joke : research does not imply publishing. Except among scientists it does. Did I get that right?
Youtube
Tiktok if you’re lucky
Facebook most likely
TRUTH SOCIAL ITS GOT TRUTH INNTHE NAME THATS HOW YOU KNOW ITS TRUE AND ITS BACKED BY THE MESSIAH TURNIP GODBBLESS STAY SAFE VOTE FOR PEDRO
The guy who set himself on fire actually had lots of proof.
Unfortunately the proof is just deranged connections
https://theponzipapers.substack.com/p/i-have-set-myself-on-fire-outside
Wow. That was a fascinating look into a paranoid mind.
My name is Max Azzarello, and I am an investigative researcher who has set himself on fire outside of the Trump trial in Manhattan.
Well he certainly knows how to write a hook
Im ashamed to say I get a visceral reaction from people misusing this word
It’s one of those unfortunate words that has multiple meanings depending on the venue/context, and where the casual meaning conflates and lessens the value of the technical meaning. Another: “experts.”
Á la recherche du science perdú! Aka “The Sound Of Silence”.
Wait, an accent on the U? I thought the participle of perdre was just perdu. Typo? Or does that accent actually have done significance here?
The correct phrase is « à la recherche de la science perdue »
Ah, merci ! I also didn’t realise that it would be conjugated to agree with “la”.
Oops, typo. My first language is Spanish, I assumed there was an accent at the end.
Tumblr
I researched the spelling of “research” for this reply. Does this count as publishing?
Slap a doi on it.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/research you should have done yours
Like most published research isn’t unreproducible horseshit mostly there because of name dropping or dollars.
Fwiw the reproducibility crisis isn’t because of “horseshit” science. There are a few examples of that for sure. But the vast majority of it is just good science that happens to be wrong. The scientific method doesn’t mean the wrong conclusion can be drawn, especially when for budgetary reasons sample sizes are relatively limited, or when the effect size being studied is small, or there are too many confounding variables.
That’s not a mark against the studies though. It’s just a mark in favour of attempting to reproduce studies and giving good funding to attempts to do so. And perhaps a mark against using one-off studies with small effect sizes to shape public policy or health advice.
My critique was not aimed at the scientific method itself nor at constraints faced by researchers. I was aiming more towards the sneering attitude that published research is the only valid method of drawing a conclusion, especially at the person level.
One published paper is not a valid method of drawing a conclusion. Studying references, citations and related papers is.
Correct, most published research is not unreproducible horseshit.
So it is reproducible horseshit, got it.
