@thor not entirely! Science is a contact sport--the whole point of scientific presentation and publication is to have other experts pick holes in your arguments, models, assumptions and conclusions. Scientists criticize each other as part of the job. There is no similarity to the cops.
Conversation
Notices
-
chiasm (chiasm@mastodon.online)'s status on Saturday, 07-May-2022 13:35:18 UTC 
chiasm
- Santa Claes πΈπͺππ°π likes this.
-
Thorwegian βοΈ (thor@berserker.town)'s status on Saturday, 07-May-2022 13:35:20 UTC 
Thorwegian βοΈ
how much authority should science have? it's clear that it has a good deal of predictive power, but how do you begin to objectively determine this power?
it seems to me that we are currently falling into a trap where we have nothing to balance out what the scientists are saying. academia is busy protecting its reputation.
but wouldn't it be better if 2 or 3 equal and opposite parts of the establishment had a critical look at each other's work?
having academic scientists criticise each other's work is like asking the police to investigate itself.
All Chirp! content and data are available under the