• @MidsizedSedan
    link
    English
    21 hour ago

    Dude, have you looked out your window? Its so obvious the qorld is flat… /s

  • @HeyThisIsntTheYMCA
    link
    English
    188 hours ago

    I once saw a cow on a roof. Can science explain that? I didn’t think so.

    • @Zorque
      link
      English
      159 hours ago

      Then baby we got an algorithm going.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2411 hours ago

    But I said the phrase “scientists don’t know everything” so now you have to listen to my bullshit.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6814 hours ago

    don’t worry, science as conclusions derived from research will soon be replaced by bullshit psuedo-research-AI-word-vomit derived from equally bullshit pre-determined conclusions

      • FundMECFS
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        And some scientists!

        “If I repeat it in enough papers it’ll become true” seems to be the mantra of scientists with hard to defend theories they claim are fact.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 hours ago

        the problem is that AI can generate a million bogus “research papers” for every single legit paper. and for the general public (ie science writers, bloggers, news reporters, etc.) they are indistinguishable from each other. so unless you have literally done the research on a particular hypothesis yourself (good luck with that, with all the funding cuts), then everything is suspect

        so the question of “are we better off with AI?” as of right now, is absolutely fucking not

      • NaibofTabr
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1412 hours ago

        AI’s primary use case so far is to further concentrate wealth with the wealthy, and to replace employees. People who think AI is bad recognize that it is in the hands of the modern generation of robber barons, and serves their interests.

        Those who don’t recognize this are delusional.

        • Mr Fish
          link
          English
          712 hours ago

          AI as a tool can absolutely be a good thing, just like almost any tool. A tool on its own is neither good nor bad, it’s just a tool that can be used. The usage is what makes it good or bad.

          Yes, most of what AI is used for now is bad, but it can absolutely be a good thing in the right use cases.

    • Mr Fish
      link
      English
      1512 hours ago

      As long as they’re shorts, only showing one vague, unverifiable, third or fourth hand anecdote each.

      • @Remember_the_tooth
        link
        English
        611 hours ago

        That makes sense. I heard that my college roommate’s pen pal said something like that.

    • @Remember_the_tooth
      link
      English
      613 hours ago

      Are they at least 3rd-hand, (or more) spurious sources with an inscrutable chain of custody, because if not, you can miss with that.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        312 hours ago

        Are they at least 3rd-hand, (or more) spurious sources with an inscrutable chain of custody

        Is there any other kind?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2214 hours ago

    That why its such a shame that big corporations can and do regularly buy scientists opinions in exchange for funding setting up a ill give $xxx.xxx for your environmental impact study to not blame my coal mine. Thus by negating the peer review process. science can sadly no longer be taken at face value with out knowing who funded it and why. i miss trusting scientists who are clearly smarter than me because they fell in to the capitalist greed trap RIP real science we should have treated you better and i am sorry.

    • @halcyoncmdr
      link
      English
      2113 hours ago

      This is why you never trust a single source. For anything. Reputable news organizations have never trusted single sources, they always use multiple sources to verify information they are told. Science is not immune from this, and never has been. And even for those that you’ve followed in the past, times change, especially in a capitalist society with a massive oligarchy that owns the news companies, like modern western civilizations. Trust, but verify.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      411 hours ago

      How often does this actually happen? The cases where this does occur stand out because they are rare. I really hate the implication that scientists are not trustworthy because some individuals acted in bad faith. Scientific fraud is real but it doesn’t mean you can’t trust science.

  • @Remember_the_tooth
    link
    English
    1313 hours ago

    Counterpoint: nuh-uh (They et. al., good ol’ days).

    Citations

    They et. al. (Good ol’ days). Trump proves that YouTube videos about The Creator that validate your feelings are equivalent to science. Many People Are Saying, 1(2), 10–20. Things I done heard. https://doi.org/I forget

    • OpenStars
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 hours ago

      Counter-counterpoint: uh… damnit, I forgot the tooth (already!?).

      A statement which somehow makes so much more sense than the rest of 2025 so far.

      You might want to banana.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1213 hours ago

    Hey, but measles in Texas, and tuberculosis in Missouri, are making comebacks!
    Ivermectin! RFKjr! Bleach!

    Learn to ReSeArcH!!

    • @Remember_the_tooth
      link
      English
      813 hours ago

      Aren’t those just from the gay space lasers and Jewish hurricanes? I feel like their resistance means we’re on the right path.