a reply to: BogieSmiles
I think that it depends on the science, but in every aspect, there is always that loathsome self-interest that comes along with scientific
inquiry--but often, rightly so. These scientists often spend years, decades, or even lifetimes on one topic, so it's not surprising that they will do
nearly anything to support the time, effort, and dedication involved.
But, this is where things go wrong, because with an underlying self-interest, there often creates a bias to want to prove a hypothesis correct, or to
second-guess and sometimes skew data in order for it to fall in line with predictions. The AGW climate 'scientists' come to mind in that regard, as do
GMO 'scientists' and the like. And behind all of that, there is a race for funding for new research and experiments (generally, a lot of it is tax
dollars), lobbyists trying to alter laws and policies (and get said tax dollars), and the third parties behind it all that make millions and millions
Some of the things are, IMO, conspiracies to keep certain scientific inquiries quelled that contradict the "accepted" point of view, and others I
think are just that some of the contradictions don't hold up to initial scrutiny and aren't pursued further by very many people.
Either way, though, I think science has been poisoned by a mixture of greed, politics, and conspiracies, and is a bastard of what it once was--at
least in the way that it is used on polarizing, ideological debates.
ETA: Take this new thread
, for example, that has a link to a
story that links undersea volcanic activity to
warming of the planet, not AGW, and shows that the whole of earth is a cyclical machine where one thing causes another and another and another over
time. But do you think studies like this cause AGW researchers to comtemplate other possibilites, or do they just keep on truckin' while more and more
research is starting to point away from man being an attributable cause of earth's warming and cooling cycles?
edit on 12-2-2015 by SlapMonkey
because: (no reason given)