It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: BO XIAN
My wife is a research professor.
It goes even deeper. It's harder and harder to find critical thinkers needed for labwork and research.
Having the internet able to answer all your questions is good in terms of the result but apparently studies are showing is altering the ability for humans to solve physical problems.
Meaning we are getting really good at following directions but very bad at here is object A and Object B study them and report their relationship and ability. Design an expirement to find results.
It's ironic that the equiptment needed to go deeper into subjects is making less people able to think deep enough to use it for its potential. Of coarse still plenty of smart people but as a whole universities are having issues finding good research grad students.
Man corrupted spirituality with most religions as well. I find most of the popular religious opinion to be false as well. When you try and recreate the expirement it doesn't hold up. Thats why the most religious parts of the country are also the poorest, violent, racist etc.
The devil's in the detail. So get you reading glasses out cause it's possibly a hose job.
originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: BO XIANAh, but they wont do that as it would lead to piracy of proposed patents.
You must know where there is new inovations (where a patented product or process could earn billions) secrecy is at the top of the agenda. That's why the public never hear of any scientific finding of any study till after the event.
originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Those are nothing compaired to selling the public drugs everyday that don't work and creating studies to falsely your results.
All the climate change solutions being proposed are utter BS.
Greenhouse gases are a fraction of the environmental disaster we are are creating. They are just basically the gun control equivalent to try and solve a massive problem. Number one the folding of habitats and it's chain reaction in addition to weather change and warming. The political solutions are only that. In some cases like carbon trade actually be competition manipulation. Political corruption is controlling innovation so peoples artifact solutions to some problems are completely stifled.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: BO XIAN
Lol. Whatever you say. Like I said your words have already exposed you. Anyone who utters the phrase "Church of Scienism" or anything like that is clearly being manipulated by a severe anti-science bias and not to be taken seriously when it comes to criticizing science.
. . . But YOU are the last person I would ever trust to point out things like this within science.
originally posted by: Greggers
There are definitely problems in science, since humans are involved, and humans have an amazingly consistent way of putting their fingerprints on every institution or process they touch.
Nonetheless, it is important to point out that science in general is not BS. Somehow, through all the perceived problems in science, it manages to be our only tool for understanding and manipulating the physical world, and as a process, has facilitated vast improvements in the basic human condition, in particular in highly developed countries with access to the products of modern science.
Engineering and medical science in particular continue to produce marvels.
The lesson from all this is to be discerning. Learn to actually read scientific studies. Be informed. There is nothing wrong with being skeptical of individual studies. In fact, proper peer review demands it, and even if you're not an active reviewer, applying the same standards is always a wise idea.
Find out, if possible, who is funding the study
Look at their method of testing
Look at the sample size
Were the subjects humans?
What was the duration of the study?
Does the outcome match up with the headline or title?
Was the study a double-blind study?
Has the study been replicated with the same results?
Think critically
originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Greggers
This is very true.
I would argue science could use a little brush up on philosophy like the rest of the public so ethics can be talked about more in depth. As far as when scientists are students.
Science is only as good as the user. It always rubbed me the wrong way when Hawking said philosophy is dead. He may be right but that isn't a good thing.
originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: BO XIAN
My wife is a research professor.
It goes even deeper. It's harder and harder to find critical thinkers needed for labwork and research.
. . .
The devil's in the detail. So get you reading glasses out cause it's possibly a hose job.
originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Greggers
Bingo.
The method of debate and exposing fallacy directly led to the modern scientific approach with Newton and empiricism (realists too).
Science is..
That's it. It's a directive.
It's like saying grammar is bs
The person doing the science is the issue.
Politics is a huge issue.
Morality around certain areas of profit and information (to me especially illness) there are difficult debates to be had but we just have poor leadership on these national conversations.