We all know academic institutions are publishing peer-reviewed garbage papers on how science has proven there are more than two genders, and such gems as "The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct," etc.
But nobody seems to care as much when these same institutions publish utter nonsense in other scientific categories, as long as it doesn't appear to have an immediate effect on society or politics.
But I would argue that we have to be consistent in our memetic ridicule, otherwise academics can always fall back on the age-old defense of "But we're scientists; people have always just trusted everything we say, because we are the authorities who decide what is true or false. We put astronauts on the moon, blah blah blah."
Making memes exposing ridiculousness in other areas of science is actually pretty easy.
It's just a matter of looking for the same types of fallacies we use to debunk the wage gap and other pseudo-scientific nonsense:
- misuse of statistics
- false equivalencies
- appeals to authority
- anecdotal evidence presented as real evidence
- exclusion of important factors
- etc.
Many categories of science are filled with garbage rhetoric these days.
Yet there are a a few categories of science that still practice the scientific method properly, and appear to be robust, rigorous, and vigilant.
Off the top of my head, some categories of GOOD science could be:
- chemistry
- quantum mechanics
- fluid dynamics
- thermodynamics
- etc.
But science gets more sketchy when you get into the "grey" sciences, where the scientific method isn't as robust, and a lot of the conclusions are more subjective.
Some categories of potentially BAD science could be:
- social sciences (possibly psychology, to an extent)
- geology
- archeology
- some areas of biology (dinosaurs are far too large to carry their own weight under Earth's current gravity)
- astrophysics (my personal pet peeve, since I've been studying this in particular)
- etc.