Suppression of Science Within Science

guerilla

guerilla

All we do is win
Aug 18, 2007
11,426
428
0
No
Suppression of Science Within Science by Henry Bauer

Figured a couple people here would get something out of this article. It's an interesting read on how science has changed.

You begin to wonder, don’t you, how many other cases there could be in science, where a single theory has somehow captured all the resources? And where competent scientists who want to try something different are not only blocked but personally insulted?

Well, there’s the matter of what killed off the dinosaurs. Everyone knows that the dinosaurs were killed off 65 million years ago when an asteroid hit the Earth. Everyone knows that, that is, except the paleontologists, whose specialty this sort of question is supposed to be.
Click to expand...
 


cool article
unfortunately this isn't anything new. Just in the last 4 years hubble disproved red phase, the base observation behind the theory of the big bang, by studying patterns in the light barrier while expecting to capture pictures of the late big bang and as big of a development as you'd think that would be astronomers just developed a new theory for how all this matter exists (theory of inflation), which just so happened to be the only apposing theory, and replaced it without a second thought to the 30 years they've been touting red phase and the singularity beginning as "fact" and ruining the careers of any professional astronomers and physicists who dared question it. You'd think the whole scientific community and world would be like holy crap our universal idea of how the universe began just changed, yet its barely news and no text books are getting changed just the terminology within the community. Now we see the same thing everytime new evidence for/against global warming comes out and it along with everything else that doesn't fit our current beliefs gets suppressed. Futhermore now i'm finding out a lot of these dinosaurs my teachers made me memorize and take tests on as a kid apparently didn't exist and were archeological mixups that they've known about forever but never bothered to tell anyone. How we managed to get past the whole idea of the world being flat is beyond me.
 
Last edited:
Everyone wants to be right..............

It's always funny to me how they make fun of Christians for having a opposing view, and they seem to carry that over to anyone that has something that opposes them.

Science would be much better if it wasn't as political :)
 
Deliguy said:
cool article
unfortunately this isn't anything new. Just in the last 4 years hubble...
Click to expand...

Usually Eli has good punctuation, capitalization and grammar. Something's up...

You programmed a bot to post on WickedFire didn't you? This is spun content! ADMIT IT!

I hear you on the dinosaurs. I was in college before someone told me the brontosaurus didn't actually exist. I felt like a jackass...
 
Deliguy said:
cool article
unfortunately this isn't anything new. Just in the last 4 years hubble disproved red phase, the base observation behind the theory of the big bang, by studying patterns in the light barrier while expecting to capture pictures of the late big bang and as big of a development as you'd think that would be astronomers just developed a new theory for how all this matter exists (theory of inflation), which just so happened to be the only apposing theory, and replaced it without a second thought to the 30 years they've been touting red phase and the singularity beginning as "fact" and ruining the careers of any professional astronomers and physicists who dared question it. You'd think the whole scientific community and world would be like holy crap our universal idea of how the universe began just changed, yet its barely news and no text books are getting changed just the terminology within the community. Now we see the same thing everytime new evidence for/against global warming comes out and it along with everything else that doesn't fit our current beliefs gets suppressed. Futhermore now i'm finding out a lot of these dinosaurs my teachers made me memorize and take tests on as a kid apparently didn't exist and were archeological mixups that they've known about forever but never bothered to tell anyone. How we managed to get past the whole idea of the world being flat is beyond me.
Click to expand...

It's one of the irrational principles outlined in the book Sway (highly recommended). Once people have committed to an idea they will do everything in their power to stay consistent with their views despite new facts.
 
As legitimate as this problem is, it won't be resolved unless it's taken up in the mainstream.

I've long held that scientific institutions are strangely exempt from procedural and intellectual auditing, and peer review is one of the biggest contributing factors. The idea that it is objective and impersonal is nothing but a ruse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: guerilla
The author is just whining about something most scientists already realize. New ideas or contrary theories always meet major resistance! This has always been the case in science.

And the scientific method is still the best method for determining truth because those poor unpopular "crackpots" with a lot of hard work can end up changing everyone's view on certain things. All they need to do is present good, irrefutable, and reproducible data.

Religion and the old "Authority" method for determining truth can't even compare.

All these things have always been imperfections in the pursuit of truth. That's because those using the Scientific method are imperfect. We're all still a bunch of bumbling idiot apes (probably) wondering what's going on in this world, and trying to retain enough status for ourselves so that we can win a female (who loves status). We have egos and hate being told we're wrong.

So everything in the article has always been done. It's probably no worse than it's always been. The minority has always had to work harder to prove themselves.
 
It's not resistance, it's persistent, organised, deliberate sabotage. They will sabotage the idea, the careers of people who work on it, they will malign the people who even consider the idea.

Unfortunately the scientific method does not account for implicit biases- basic human behavior. The assumption is that people will be objective, people will tell the truth. Justice and honesty are assumed to be a given. Unfortunately this is not the case.
 
Ar Scion said:
It's not resistance, it's persistent, organised, deliberate sabotage. They will sabotage the idea, the careers of people who work on it, they will malign the people who even consider the idea.
Click to expand...

Everything you've listed always happened. Seriously.


Ar Scion said:
Unfortunately the scientific method does not account for implicit biases- basic human behavior. The assumption is that people will be objective, people will tell the truth. Justice and honesty are assumed to be a given. Unfortunately this is not the case.
Click to expand...

You should give the method a little more credit than that. Do you really think Francis Bacon said to himself, "Hmm, yah, I think i can rely on people to be unbiased, objective, and truthful at all times!". No, of course not. That's the reason the method is the way that it is. Theories constantly require reproducible evidence and even then are never considered 100% true or a 100% accurate view of the way reality truly is. But with the scientific method Bullshit will likely come out over time. Lies will likely be uncovered over time, etc. Coverups will likely come out over time.


And honestly, I saw the fucking shit about the New World Order in the article... It always comes down to that with some of you guys doesn't it? It's alllllll a biiiiiiig conspiracy. :)
 
Deliguy said:
Just in the last 4 years hubble disproved red phase, the base observation behind the theory of the big bang, by studying patterns in the light barrier while expecting to capture pictures of the late big bang and as big of a development as you'd think that would be astronomers just developed a new theory for how all this matter exists (theory of inflation), which just so happened to be the only apposing theory, and replaced it without a second thought to the 30 years they've been touting red phase and the singularity beginning as "fact" and ruining the careers of any professional astronomers and physicists who dared question it.
Click to expand...

Inflation is thought to be one of the stages at/after the big bang. The Universe - you can see from that older site that it has been considered for awhile. I know the Hubble Telescope has changed theories, but I believe it has only improved the accuracy of Hubble's constant, which has to do with redshift.


WickedJoe said:
The author is just whining about something most scientists already realize.
Click to expand...

And in this case the author thinks HIV and sex have little or nothing to do with AIDS. He instead believes that it is caused by the wild homosexuals doing drugs, and for babies it is really just because of malnutrition or something like that.

The article does make some good points and I do think that "alternative" research sometimes gets too easily dismissed. Thousands of people think they have been abducted by aliens, so an academic should be free to look into that without instantly being labeled as a crazy UFO guy. However, if they start demanding that NASA give them research money or some type of recognition, then it becomes a different thing.
 
Eli: You mean my magical Leopluradon doesn't exist!?!? NNNOOOOO!!!!

GoogleSearchSux said:
It's one of the irrational principles outlined in the book Sway (highly recommended). Once people have committed to an idea they will do everything in their power to stay consistent with their views despite new facts.
Click to expand...
It's called "Confirmation Bias"

nvanprooyen: MM climate change or not, there's plenty of other good reasons to put that kind of money into anti-pollution efforts. Climate change hysteria, whether founded or not, is just the latest way to get people remembering that we've been poisoning the world for the last century or so and to get off arses and do something about it.
 
I enjoyed reading this article, I appreciate candor especially within science, where truth needs to be untarnished without agendas and politics. Good stuff!
 
HarveyJ said:
nvanprooyen: MM climate change or not, there's plenty of other good reasons to put that kind of money into anti-pollution efforts.
Click to expand...
The problem with progressives is that they love to spend other people's money for every bleeding heart initiative they can think up.

Spend your own money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom