What’s the coolest thing about science?

[Takes Two To Tango]

The coolest thing about science for me, it's ever changing it's not stagnant.

It's constantly trying to improve it's information.

It's an open-minded ideology.

 

[Flower2dPeople]

That you can trust it 100℅.

 

[Kowboy On Sherdog]

When you get blinded by it

 

[Sycho Sid]

Science is for nerds

 

[Long Dark Blues]

Absolute zero.

 

[I Am Legion]

I like the science behind it.

 

[LEWIS540]

Science literally never changes.

 

[usernamee]

Probably when it's industry sponsored and biased

 

[Berserker13]

how it constantly is proving itself wrong

 

[Spam On Rye]

Not sure what you mean by "open-minded ideology" but yeah science is a useful tool to help us understand phenomenon in the natural world.

 

[BluntForceTrama]

The scientific method for sure is the coolest thing because I love arguments and logic. The SM is the foundation

Darwin’s story is pretty amazing too

 

[Gene Tunney]

 

[pugilistico]

Remember my thread about how people are getting dumber?

 

[Takes Two To Tango]

Not sure what you mean by "open-minded ideology" but yeah science is a useful tool to help us understand phenomenon in the natural world.

I meant the ideas in science is constantly being challenged and it's open to new ideas. That's what I meant.

 

[whocares]

It's an ever expanding encyclopedia of all of human knowledge and discovery. Science measures and documents our progress as a species.

 

[Michaelangelo]

When you can make up shit to get money to research it

 

[Jackonfire]

The way it triggers a certain portion of the population

 

[milliniar]

T(t)=TS+(T0−Ts)e−k

 

[Beechwood]

Our current scientific studies are all to often flawed, biased and corrupt. What would help is a new method for judging scientific research. At the heart of the problem, our commonly used peer review method is flawed.

Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals​

Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals - PMC

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

.....So we have little evidence on the effectiveness of peer review, but we have considerable evidence on its defects. In addition to being poor at detecting gross defects and almost useless for detecting fraud it is slow, expensive, profligate of academic time, highly subjective, something of a lottery, prone to bias, and easily abused.....

 

[Cool Hand Luke]

When you get blinded by it

I thought that was the light