"Science" is failing as an institution

But hey, at least it's diverse, right?
bbc.com/news/science-environment-39054778

Attached: 1568395958546.jpg (659x729, 121K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
youtube.com/watch?v=9teDD_nY-KU
youtube.com/watch?v=El1Z7yLZDv8
reddit.com/r/accountt1234/comments/5umtip/scientific_circular_reasoning/
medicalhypotheses.blogspot.com/2010/05/medical-hypotheses-affair-times-higher.html
slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/
nytimes.com/2013/04/28/magazine/diederik-stapels-audacious-academic-fraud.html?pagewanted=all
youtube.com/watch?v=8kBD3lOax44
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Almost like the goal is to create studies that confirm political biases

Almost more like current science has railed off into the mathemagics instead of observing the real world.

Attached: science mathemagicians.jpg (850x400, 69K)

I JUST CONFIRMED THIS: PUSHING YOUR FEET DOWN REALLY HARD WHILE PLUGGING YOUR LEFT EAR AND SPINNING AROUND IN A CIRCLE CURES THE HICCUPS

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

>According to a 2016 poll of 1,500 scientists reported that 70% of them had failed to reproduce at least one other scientist's experiment (50% had failed to reproduce one of their own experiments). In 2009, 2% of scientists admitted to falsifying studies at least once and 14% admitted to personally knowing someone who did. Misconducts were reported more frequently by medical researchers than others

Its not most, its almost all

Part of it is funding. Getting money to do 1 study is hard enough, getting money to do the same exact study to double check is infinitely harder.

I knew it as soon as Bill Nye went full libtard

old news and barely accurate. the last few years brought a literal cure for HIV, ebola vaccine, artificial wombs and genetically modified humans. kindly fuck off with this alarmist horseshit

NO!

Attached: 1558532341428.png (1080x1020, 475K)

CAN CONFIRM THIS user IS RIGHT AND REPUTABLE.

Something from nothing
No real proof
Destroy God

>mathemagics
youtube.com/watch?v=9teDD_nY-KU

Attached: __oikura_sodachi_monogatari_series_and_etc_drawn_by_yuki_usagi__9271dca5c4b83dcc5d7acf527b9d9406.jpg (612x816, 454K)

>Cure for ebola and HIV vaccines
>Good things

lol look at all those fucking memes
Truvada isn't a cure you dumb homo!

Medical science is just one part of science.

>spent 3 weeks total doing an experiment with data supporting my hypothesis
>tried to reproduce it, data basically supported that nothing happened at all, hypothesis not supported
>Fuck

Now imagine there was a bunch of Jewish pharmaceutical executives commanding you

HARRISON BERGERON

and they wonder why manufacturing is dead

It gets worse with statistical data with leftist institutions inputting false data sets. Next 5 years, they'll be able to prove anything they want.

ye ye ye. How do you know it truly works? And if it does, how about the side effects?
Most scientists are just pseudo-intellectual retards, who are ruining the world, instead of curing it. Each "solution" for a problem, a (((scientist))) creates 3 more problems.

Who knew letting women into everything would turn everything to shit. The reason why science had such a boom in the past is because men compete, and when men compete things are discovered and produced. When women get into shit it all just becomes a feel-goody pussy rubbing contest

Attached: 6gorilliondeadspacelanders.jpg (1100x792, 131K)

wut? The problem is that even when they re-run experiments they are unable to duplicate results. This isn't "we'd like to do more of these validation studies and can't get cash", it's "Wow it seems like lots of people are cooking the numbers"

phdfag here, can confirm the numbers are cooked.

Offer someone with hiccups a reward, a dollar or something, the next time they hiccup and they won't be able to hiccup anymore. I heard that on one of those doctor call-in shows a long time ago and it actually works.

sounds legit

Fuck off anti-science shill.

I'm a science believer, and science is always right.

>Most scientists are just pseudo-intellectual retards
as opposed to an enlightened euphoric individual such as yourself

This isn't news to anyone I hope. The battle to get funding has left a permanent stain on the scientific process.
Although it should be mentioned that it only applies to certain branches of science where p-hacking was rampent in the fitst place.

>vindicated again
youtube.com/watch?v=El1Z7yLZDv8

From reading the article and wiki, it looks like the vast majority of replication crises are in bio and psych. Makes sense considering these are the brainlets of the science world.

Attached: purity.png (740x308, 32K)

We are unwittingly headed into another dark age

Reliability is a must for anything to be even mentioned as scientific. But "science" has become a non-word for the left to claim their subjective nonsense as objective truth. Also, following basic scientific standards is racist, as they contradict most of the lefts ideas and would also push out niggers and shitskins, because they lack the capabilities to do so.

It's what happens when Jews politicize everything to their advantage.

There's a few types of failure to replicate. Social science fails because it's largely ideological bullshit with no sample size. Ecology is hard to replicate because it's difficult to burn down the same forest twice to check.

bio just that way. you can't easily replicate experiments on animals, because each lab is different - handling of the animals, housing, strains, ways of collecting tissue, data analysis - it's just too much. I agree on psych though, it's a meme science.

>meme science

because we are so naive in our understanding of how the mind works? not a meme science, just poorly understood and hard to obtain objective results/evidence

It's 2019 where there is 37 genders and transwomen can have abortions, and feelings trump facts.

correct. that's precisely what I meant by it being a meme science. still a science

The OP is not anti-science. He's against what science has become, and he is right. It's become an elitist ivory-tower club of those lucky enough to be thrown scraps from giant corporations in return for metaphorically sucking their cock in every single thing you do. Meanwhile, the scientists of yore are so revered and respected, so elevated upon their pedestal that any progress or new discoveries which threatens to besmirch their good name is viciously suppressed. At the present rate, science risks entering a new dark age. We need to turn things around and the first step is awareness.

Hiccups are proof of evolution
>Would you like to know more?

this needs to be memed against faggots, trannies, weirdo post-gender freaks and to nogs in africa about the bad "white man voodoo magic science"

Attached: 1556085684026.gif (728x408, 1.78M)

Fuck this world. Boomers ruined it

>science risks entering a new dark age

we're already past the point where statistics are racist, facts are racist, biology is racist. We've already thrown objectivity out the window in exchange for good feels

The issue is they can't prove all their bullshit PC "science" that lets there be micro agressions and millions of genders. It is the same problem they have with AI. They make up a lot of bullshit that can't stand the light of truth.

Lmao it's not an HIV cure if you have to keep taking the pills for the rest of your life. That's a treatment. Do insulin injections cure diabetes you absolute retard?

>Sequential LASER ART and CRISPR Treatments Eliminate HIV-1 in a Subset of Infected Humanized Mice
>calling me a retard for wordplay
>still being wrong
your next dumb post is going to be how these aren't humans but mice and therefore all of the research is invalid

And yet people still get HIV all the time. Guess it doesn't work retard

holy shit you're a fucking mouthbreather aren't you

The only thing that cures diabetes is putting the damn sugar drinks down. They lie when they say it's 0 calories.

Too many carbs and not enough proteins. Mono and poly fats with a hint of saturated. Avoid foods with words like "hydrolyzed" anything. That's trans fat and if they have less than half a gram per serving they can display as zero despite things like hydrolyzed vegetable oil and hydrolyzed basedbean oil being trans fat.

The healthy fats are mono and poly and saturated in sprinkle amounts. Trans fats do nothing positive for the body.

Diabetes can be cured by simply changing the diet.

> basedbean
$○Ybean oil

I hate 4 chan sometimes.
I know they have been messing with my inputs but things like this makes that obvious.

>It is the same problem they have with AI.
I loved reading stories about AI put in production at Amazon to guide hiring/promotion to improve productivity and it coming back with the most (((racist))) and (((sexist))) conclusions despite having no training data relevant to race or sex.

wrong. Scientists just like philiosphers especially new age ones are egotists and not impartial observers. Perhaps more so than an average man because of the fame and payoff if their "right" about something previously unknown.

they're* too drunk for pol, time for bed

Do you expect anything different on pol?

Where 80% of them probably think evolution isnt real or that aliens built the pyramids.

I feel you're neglecting to mention the joke that is the social sciences.

It's a huge problem on every single field. Gubirmint funding ruined universities.

It happens every time. AI can't lie and shows the world as it actually is, which is why it is always "racist" and "sexist". It is the only thing holding back silicon valley from a complete takeover.

OY VEY GOYIM, THIS VACCINE WORKS JUST LISTEN TO THE LOBBYISTS, NOW QUICKLY INJECT EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD IN YOUR COUNTRY WITH IT BEFORE ANOTHER 6 GORRILLION DIE BECAUSE OF YOUR ANTISEMITISM

Attached: foorpags.jpg (1200x857, 275K)

Science is mostly just used to sell worthless shit and get political agendas through. Only retards believe science without question.

I wonder

Attached: 1522295530520.png (522x767, 354K)

This thread has nothing to do with "PC" or "liberals", fuck off MIGA retard.

Attached: science modern nonsense.jpg (1080x1920, 289K)

Of casue, but these flaws are more or less inherent to the fields. This crisis of repeatability is something else, it's downright malicious.

>Well, circular reasoning occurs elsewhere too, namely, within the scientific community. If I wanted to, I could show you a long list of studies that prove things annoying people like me enjoy arguing against scientists, technicians, atheists and other STEM-nerds. There are randomized controlled trials in peer reviewed scientific journals, that prove the effectiveness of prayer, psychics, astrology, remote viewing, GMO crops being unhealthy, 9/11 being an inside job, vaccines being dangerous, cell phones causing cancer and so forth. All ideas that horrify "skeptical" progressive secular intellectuals.
>The thing about these studies is, that "skeptics" will point out how these journals have a low impact factor, which they use as evidence to suggest that the studies are not very reliable. What's an impact factor? An impact factor decides how prominent a scientific journal is within the scientific community, by measuring how often an average paper published in the journal is quoted in other scientific journals.
>It goes without saying, that this rapidly leads to a circlejerk. Anyone who has ever spoken to Phd students or post-docs knows how it goes. When you publish a study, you're using the study to make a name for yourself within your scientific discipline. You meet people at conferences who might one day have a position for you in their faculty, or who might get a share of subsidies or have some other general favor for you. As a result, you have an obligation, to flatter those people. So what do you do? When you write your own scientific paper, you cite those people. And as a result, their study gains more authority, as well as the journal in which they published their study.

reddit.com/r/accountt1234/comments/5umtip/scientific_circular_reasoning/

>he can't instantly stop hiccups just by concentrating

Fucking lack of mind-body connection pleb

What's the book?

Um have any of you been to uni?
People are constantly colluding and cheating on the tests, the invigilators at my uni are primed to expect it from asian students. Science is mainstream now so you can expect to see about 50% (as per the bell curve) to be retarded. If 2 percent of published science is good then everything is normal. If more than everything is good. If less... You better start studying finance.

Jesus Christ, was this written by a disgrunteled masters reject?

Scientist here
This seems to be the case more and more
The left is destroying everything

This plus variations in lab setups and incomplete documentation of original experiments.

also, from the comments on that post, this is a former editor of a scientific journal who was ousted for attempting to publish something that goes against the HIV-AIDS orthodoxy

>So I expected that Duesberg's paper either would be ignored or would trigger letters and other papers countering the ideas and evidence presented. Medical Hypotheses would have published these counter-arguments, then provided space for Duesberg to respond to the criticisms and later allowed critics to reply to Duesberg's defence. That is, after all, how real science is supposed to work.

>What I did not expect was that editors and scientists would be bypassed altogether, and that the matter would be settled by the senior managers of a multinational publishing corporation in consultation with pressure-group activists. Certainly, that would never have happened 25 years ago, when I began research in science.

medicalhypotheses.blogspot.com/2010/05/medical-hypotheses-affair-times-higher.html

I'm going to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume that's it's mostly because the methods sections of most scientific papers don't go into enough detail to be adequately reproducible, sometimes really mundane things like the room temperature of the lab that you wouldn't bother putting in a methods section can screw up an experiment. Journals like to keep the methods section of the papers as small as possible because they no that 99% of the people reading the paper won't read it since they only care about the results and their implications.

Although when it comes to stuff like psychological studies there's fuck all scientific rigorousness so I'm not surprised most of that isn't reproducible.

>liberals adopt science
>science stops being scientific and becomes propaganda

What's that? Gender and race has no basis in biology? Let me check this genome and see if I get the same-- no, you're full of shit.

I think he meant type 1 diabetes, not fat american syndrome.

>The modern research community knows they aren’t producing the best science they could be. There’s lots of publication bias, statistics are done in a confusing and misleading way out of sheer inertia, and replications often happen very late or not at all. And sometimes someone will say something like “I can’t believe people are too dumb to fix Science. All we would have to do is require early registration of studies to avoid publication bias, turn this new and powerful statistical technique into the new standard, and accord higher status to scientists who do replication experiments. It would be really simple and it would vastly increase scientific progress. I must just be smarter than all existing scientists, since I’m able to think of this and they aren’t.”

>And yeah. That would work for the Science God. He could just make a Science Decree that everyone has to use the right statistics, and make another Science Decree that everyone must accord replications higher status.

>But things that work from a god’s-eye view don’t work from within the system. No individual scientist has an incentive to unilaterally switch to the new statistical technique for her own research, since it would make her research less likely to produce earth-shattering results and since it would just confuse all the other scientists. They just have an incentive to want everybody else to do it, at which point they would follow along. And no individual journal has an incentive to unilaterally switch to early registration and publishing negative results, since it would just mean their results are less interesting than that other journal who only publishes ground-breaking discoveries. From within the system, everyone is following their own incentives and will continue to do so.

slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

That was the most hilarious thing about about the Amazon bot. They tried doing some handwaving about it just replicating "unconscious bias" in how productivity was measured.

It was literally just various objective performance metrics (i.e., time between orders, total orders per shift, etc.) tracked by inventory control with no human judgement. Because they'd already stripped out all the subjective stuff trying to fix previous rounds of (((bad))) results.

tummo breathing is the superior hiccup cure
pharmaceutical chemist here, no doubt about this, across the board most people in academia inflate their results or the significance, and certain subfields such as cancer gene therapy etc are so ridden with lies, exaggerated results, deliberately skewed stats etc. its gotten to the point when big pharma publish more reliable results than academia

Kary Mullis, coinventor of PCR, had his career ruined for disagreeing about aids. Free thinkers indeed

Throw “publish or perish” on top of that.

Madonna herself can't replicate her own voice. That's the kind of an capitalism we dealing with here.

>Sequential LASER ART and CRISPR Treatments Eliminate HIV-1 in a Subset of Infected Humanized Mice
AWESOME now we just need to do it a trillion more times and we can cure someone

At this point, the dependency network of scientific findings purported to be the knowledge base of our modern material philosophy, is so vast and irreproducable that is becomes a bigger leap of faith to accept, than a religous view of the world.
You can drawl, "IT"S REPRODUCABLE," but even presuming every study IS CORRECT as claimed and the purported framework of the world is as claimed, an individual ConScience, skeptical, will never be able to reproduce all those things and verify. This affects the psyche of the people, and their congruency with the orthodoxy. Neat to think about, as you can make conclusions from here as well.
Also, fuck the kikes.

Attached: 1568430120587.jpg (750x709, 84K)

nytimes.com/2013/04/28/magazine/diederik-stapels-audacious-academic-fraud.html?pagewanted=all
Guy fabricated every expirement he supposedly conduct, still was considered one of the best in his field.

your point being?

it's pretty fascinating to see how that orthodoxy formed and destroyed anybody in its path. like the holocaust, even bringing up the slightest doubt about it INFURIATES non-experts, random people who shouldn't have any emotional connection to the subject. it's pretty bizarre to be on the outside of that kind of cultural programming.

It's the norm. That's what diversity has brought us.

>just poorly understood and hard to obtain objective results/evidence

Obtaining objective results is exactly what science is.

Related: the placebo effect has gotten stronger over time as people's faith in science/medicine has grown.

all these things in the end will make species weaker

I knew that retard had to be a "diversity hire" for typing something that brandead up.

What do you mean fren?

Attached: 1567865330258.gif (540x540, 1.9M)

Yes, and in Psych it's hard to do. Much harder than nearly any other field due to the subject being experimented on. Yes, it would be "more objective" to be able to raise humans from birth isolated in habitats and force feed them stimuli to collect data, but that's never going to happen.

You never disappoint me.

So wouldn’t that just make psych a set of philosophies rather than a science? Isn’t the real science then just neurology and cognitive science?

Always happy to entertain.

Science has been bought for a while man. Have you seen that JRE where the two guys who made bullshit academic papers are on? It's great give it a watch

>philiosphers ... are egotists and not impartial observers

fuck that impartial shit, empiricism is a failure of philosophy. your mind if your own unless someone else makes it theirs.

It's mostly that the current system is designed so that the average scientist spends 10 months out of a year working on new experiments to keep their tenure and 2 months trying to keep up with the field.

>a literal cure for HIV
Curing HIV is easy as fuck. The virus wipes itself out in humans over the course of a few years.
The issue is making sure your immune system still works at the end of it.

omg you mean antidepressants don't really make people sane through chemical balancing?

youtube.com/watch?v=8kBD3lOax44