Social People with extreme anti-science views know the least, but think they know the most: study

People who think the moon landing was fake
What is anti-science about that?

I hope you are not saying that all conspiracy theories are anti-science. That would be a laugher, especially since many former conspiracy theories happen to be truths/facts now.
 
Well duuh. We got TheDunningKrugerKid right here in the WR proving that point daily.
 
Big surprise. And it's getting worse with social media. There's a huge movement of twitter moms who feed off of each other's dumb fuckery at the expense of their children.

DvcgWy_UUAIFLlg.jpg:small

What is ironic is the fact that vaccine proponents are some of the most scientifically illiterate people out there. The "science" behind vaccination is is so poor that even after 50-60 years we don't really have good information to base a risk/benefit analysis. All we have is monied interests insisting they are all "safe and effective" and a bunch of rubes parroting the same thing while proclaiming to be the arbitors of science, lol!
 
Big surprise. And it's getting worse with social media. There's a huge movement of twitter moms who feed off of each other's dumb fuckery at the expense of their children.

DvcgWy_UUAIFLlg.jpg:small

I learned about blue collar knowledge on sherdog the other week. It was stuff that one could learn from youtbue > professional training or higher education.

I think it may fit into this 'self assessment'.
 
It is always to give the purchaser of the study what they want. The customer is always right, so science and its methods have to bend a little.

Curious to find out what you’re basing that opinion on. Not a loaded question, but have you done any research e.g. in a lab? Do you have experience in a scientific field? How does the peer review process fit into your view?
 
You can eat your chicken and drink your milk that was pumped full of steroids and a daily supply of antibiotics but I try my hardest not to eat that.

I try and buy food that doesn’t use factory farming practice so. Especially when it comes to meat

Funny stuff.
There are no GMO chickens.
This is exactly the kind of ignorance the article is pointing out.
Thanks for sharing.
 
Curious to find out what you’re basing that opinion on. Not a loaded question, but have you done any research e.g. in a lab? Do you have experience in a scientific field? How does the peer review process fit into your view?
I worked for a mang in the 80's who served as a program director at NIH with a huge budget at his disposal. When he saw how nefarious and political science had become, he quit and started up his own D.C. Think tank.
 
I'm sure this study was conducted in good faith. With no agenda. Purely science.

Yeah, all these nefarious scientists have been scheming and plotting in their evil laboratories how to stick it to all the barely literate folk living on the fringes of society. I’m sure it keeps them awake at night.
 
It is always to give the purchaser of the study what they want. The customer is always right, so science and its methods have to bend a little.

There comes a point where the evidence and the consensus become overwhelming and "bought" studies are shredded under peer review and can no longer continue. As an example Exxon, Aramco, Shell, Sinopec, BP and all the other top energy companies now accept AGW even though in the past they've spent millions funding research against it.
 
There comes a point where the evidence and the consensus become overwhelming and "bought" studies are shredded under peer review and can no longer continue. As an example Exxon, Aramco, Shell, Sinopec, BP and all the other top energy companies now accept AGW even though in the past they've spent millions funding research against it.
th
 
There comes a point where the evidence and the consensus become overwhelming and "bought" studies are shredded under peer review and can no longer continue. As an example Exxon, Aramco, Shell, Sinopec, BP and all the other top energy companies now accept AGW even though in the past they've spent millions funding research against it.
There are limits to what can be accompolished, and the winds are always changing as realities emerge.

I guess I shouldn't tell you of the foods that contain human ingredients. OR the blood that is dyed white and sold as milk.
 
I said in my post I try and stay away from any meat that has been given growth hormones, steroids and antibiotics.

Maybe there was some confusion

Apparently, this thread is about GMOs.
You can't avoid GMOs and they're perfectly safe, just like the meat you avoid.
 
@TheComebackKid knows there are problems with a sophisticated narrative like evolution. Evolution is very general in what we know, despite the specificity at times, given its scope. He's correct about the nonsense associated with the assuredness surrounding evolution. It is vague, though elegant in its general ability to be confirmed. It's akin to history, shadowy and built on foundations of sand.

What's your education level and concentration?
 
So this is the academic community whining how the public doesn't reflexively accept everything they are told?



"If you don't conede that we're right about everything all the time, then there is something wrong with you" .

So when it does come out they're wrong here and there, do they apologize to the ones that were right the whole time for mocking them, or did they deserve to be mocked for simply doubting our Gods?
 
Back
Top