gertjohnny
196522
6474
290
That's true
Sep 24, 2017 1:05 AM
gertjohnny
196522
6474
290
hedgewizard
It's not an inability, it's a refusal.
SomeCrazyNerd
Sounds like a CHINESE HOAX TO ME!!!/S
M4nFle5h
Love it
Cattsass
So is this in reference to the bullshit about there being more than 2 genders?
ForReasonsOfScience
This is called the argument from personal incredulity, and yes, it is definitely a fallacy.
MorbundRotund
This sign is clearly a subliminal pusch by big marker and the Sharpie corporation!
KingOfTheAnarchists
r/buttsharpies is the liminal push.
BlunderbussVigilante
Marker fumes cause autism!
Buster11
You get it
pookieeatworld
The lobbyists are out of control.
Spartacus90
someone read this to trump voters
AzoriusJ
You hear that republicans? Climate change.
HighFunctioningAlcoholic
Great job! Way to advance dialogue! You are the reason it has become a partisan issue.
breadbench123
My argument is true because you can't understand it! Fallacies, fallacies, fallacies.
IndyAndyJones
In many cases it's not an inability to grasp the facts, it's an unwillingness. Which is even worse.
MrFnortner
If I defy gravity ("I dare you to hold me down, you big bully!") will I float away?
IndyAndyJones
Nope.
ReichErruschach
OMNSN
Which science era? My kids range from 3yr up to 15 yrs. You have no idea how much medical advice & findings have changed.
TheGreyGryphon
As knowledge grows advice changes.
Factist
Science isnt a popularity contest.
cousteau
*downvotes comment and upvotes another saying otherwise*
Factist
There are only 2 genders. gender is synonyms with sex.
theseagullsaysmine
Can anyone here tell what's on the other side?
KiloPandemic
It says "evidence trumps opinion" I think, messed with the contrast to see
LiterallyYourMom
Also, simply asking a question in a smug tone isn't proof of anything. "If ______ then how come I can _____? Checkmate!"
jadespider
don't argue against science, but do question whether something is science or sensationalism.
breadbench123
Yes, you do argue against science, that's the whole point of science, rational thoughts and research disproves old theories etc.
jadespider
Skepticism of the validity of an argument is fundamental to the scientific process. Skepticism of the credibility of a presentation is (1/
jadespider
fundamental to the pursuit of truth. (2/2)
panheadaj
Sometimes this is just an argument against people who actually do understand science, but the opposition just doesn't want to admit it
panheadaj
E.g. "You just don't understand science" Just saying
pithacus
science is applied conditionally. yes for climate, yes for abortion, no for how many genders, no for why fewer women in STEM.. etc.
gazxog42
Trying to talk science is like pissing against the wind and expecting not to smell like piss
Jewf
Is this directed at the fact that there's 2 genders or global warming? Or both?
TheGreyGryphon
Ah those weasel words. "The fact that...."
Djlunchmeat
God made us with the ability to evolve.
Nordenfeldt
Evolution gave us intelligence and imaginations, and the ability to invent gods.
dxwill103
Which one?
IjustChangedMyNameToProveAPoint
Yes
KiloPandemic
The back looks to say "Evidence Trumps Opinion" for the curious
LetMeDesecrateU
I read "Evidence Trumps Onions"
darkhavana0512
DMGuy
He's never looked better, honestly.
Gaidenninjacat
A better statement would be "Science doesnt give a shit about your opinion."
BronzeLeaguePro
No but peer reviewers might, and so does the guys who give out grant money. Science has been politicised and it's fucking scary.
Gaidenninjacat
Peer reviews are less about opinion and more about ensuring accuracy of data and collection meathods ect. But bias does exist.
BronzeLeaguePro
Do you think that people are as aggressively checking research they agree with? And if we agree that bias exist, is it not worrisome if
BronzeLeaguePro
most of the academe have a bent towards one side of the political aisle? After all, the majority will have an easier time then.
lostinukraine
What’s science fact today is laughed at tomorrow
danielsan1977
Good thing nothing is ever considered "science fact". Just "what is most likely according to the available evidence". Bit of mouthful, tho.
breadbench123
And that is exactly where the problem lies with all the "scientists" protesting.
IjustChangedMyNameToProveAPoint
Not according to the general public tho
Cheomesh
Er.no, there are inded scientific facts. There are also theories, which are based on them.
breadbench123
Back to school you go.
danielsan1977
"Facts" meaning what is most likely, given the available evidence.
KeglestheElf
Its gotten so bad I can't tell if this is pro climate change or anti gender fluidity.
CyborgScribe
Gender fluidity is a pretty solid concept. The question isn't "does gender expression vary" but "does anyone have the right to demand 50...
CyborgScribe
...different gender pronouns."
breadbench123
Yes, essentially just personality traits, but I can't demand you to call me xe master, nor do physical features have anything to do with it.
KeeleonOhms
Is "science" really the go to argument against genddr non comformity? Psychology is a pretty open ended "science"...
Cheesecakecrush
Being told something is "science" and then believing it unconditionally is just as bad as not believing it unconditionally.
Rovenlock
Doubt everything
KeeleonOhms
It pretty much goes against the scientific method.
[deleted]
[deleted]
DaedaIus
To be fair, there were 40ish peer reviewed papers against man made climate change just last year. It's a hotly debated issue.
Cheesecakecrush
But a large segment of our population has decided that not being 100% in the "its our fault" camp means you're a "denier."
Cheesecakecrush
Which sounds an awful lot like "BURN THE HERETIC" if you ask me.
DaedaIus
Honestly, I'm surprised I'm in the positives, I usually get downvoted to hell for that statement.
Cheesecakecrush
Post all the angry signs you want, throw every downvote, throw every tantrum. The "science" is not settled, that is not what science is.
breadbench123
Scientific theories need to constantly be kept questioned, that's how science developed to what it is today.
TheGreyGryphon
The science is also not 100% disproven by a single additional study or two that comes up with different findings.
Cheesecakecrush
Science is the pursuit of truth through observation, testing, and analysis. Not "fuck yeah science!" when some nifty thing hits your FB feed
TheGreyGryphon
That high horse of yours is in the fucking clouds man.
Chereazi
Cherry picking stuff out of studies where the researchers say that it's most likely due to biases isn't valid either by the way xD
TonawandaBlue
Funny how we have two almost identical posts promoting the exact same type of ignorance showing up at the exact same time.
SomeCrazyNerd
Ignorance?
prosvade1337
I say the same thing when people try to say consoles are better than PC
TwatSprinkle
Consoles are better than PC
NachoPete
Damn peasants!
robsablah
I would say that is choice over opinion or fact. I choose PC however. Console peasants can have their say also, Just... over there.
Corona688
Having an opinion doesn't mean its not objectively wrong.
humptydumptywastheking
PC master race.
YourenotgonnalikewhatIsay
dwilson0725
This isn't even a debate. Exclusives are all they have, so it's an artificial pro. lol
CyborgScribe
I fail to see how this relates at all. PCs have superior processing power and graphical capability. Consoles have ease of use and often cost
CyborgScribe
...both have their own strengths so right/wrong doesn't work so well here.
GaySocialistLiberalMuslimCommieAtheist
Consoles have standard parts and exclusives. If you play online console cost will easily Trump pc cost.
CyborgScribe
I'm guessing your a PC master race type? Look, you do you. I game in multiple ways myself.
GaySocialistLiberalMuslimCommieAtheist
I do too. But literally the only advantage consoles have is standard parts and exclusives games. Pc wins everything else.
prosvade1337
Cost? PC is pretty cheap
buzzedouttechguy
Blindly following studies that cherry pick data and ignore contradictory findings isn't a good idea either.
EdHochuli
You’re a brave man/lady. That is edgy for this crowd.
3HeadedWeasel
That is not science. Very not good.
NotABadLookingNarcissist
Understanding this, is part of understanding science.
BunnieWigglesworth
Well that wouldn't actually be science then, would it?
Cheomesh
If it does that, it is not science.
SudoNimm
This sign doesn't say or imply that we should blindly follow data either...
CyborgScribe
Data is not science. Are not science? Data is the plural of datum right?
IfTheresTwoThingsIKnowInLifeItsHowToUnderDeliver
Correct! Are not, as weird as it may sound, is right
amoeba15
In US English it is "is" instead of "are" because it's a collective group. Just like we say "Metallica is" instead of "Metallica are".
ZacWarSteiner
Still one lumped thing. No plurii.
PETTdavids
It is plural. Two datum are data.
ialwayssaywhyiupvotestuff
Yeah people don't seem to talk about this side of "science." Really, money is king, not facts or truth.
rambosmurf
I agree peer review is important. But on some issues if you don't tow the politically correct line your revenue stream dries up.
NastyBert2000
This sounds more like a clickbait headline than a systemic problem. Most science is on pretty dry subjects, not hot issues. Source/examples?
eggmuffin
Which is why peer reviews are so important. It keeps you from just making shit up, like "vaccines cause autism".
NastyBert2000
Funding is definitely a known issue. But other researchers are constantly trying to outdo their peers. Truth moderates who comes out ahead.
CaveManFindNumberBox
As an actual researcher, not really. The number one concern among my colleagues is reproducibility and transparency.
seayunexyusdei
Are you a climate scientist?
ialwayssaywhyiupvotestuff
Money has a tendency to influence all sorts of things people consider concerns though
DurzoBlint101
DuckPlanetKing
Contradictory findings are fine if they did a study.. contradictory opinions just because you're a tv or radio talking head are not
SickBragAbout
But they aren't fine. They don't get published if against the status quo. Hence the reason why it isn't real science. Trust me. I know.
BronzeLeaguePro
Hell, there's even studies with such gross idiocies like using people's subjective experiences as objective measurements. That's just bad.
PatrikLilja
Contradictory opinions based on contradictory findings are common among scientists. For outsiders that seems to invalidate science. 1/2
PatrikLilja
For scientists disagreement are common place and usually creates validity in the end. 2/2
RavensX1X
But all too often the disagreement is between the group think and the outsider.
GaySocialistLiberalMuslimCommieAtheist
Usually it creates more studies, theories and studies on new theories to find out more.
PatrikLilja
Exactly. If a scientist disagrees or disbelieve another scientist they can conduct other studies. I know scientists that openly disagree 1/2
BronzeLeaguePro
No, fuck right off. You don't need a study to find contradictions to a study. If a study predicts something over the next 5 years, then
BronzeLeaguePro
it's a perfectly reasonable rebuttal to wait five years, check its predictions and contradict it if its predictions does not bear out.
Koolala
So lets say you get a dirty cut, and studies say in 2 weeks the infection will kill you if you don't treat it. will you wait 2 weeks to see?
BronzeLeaguePro
What the hell does that have to do with anything.
PrincessDonaldTrumpBANNED2
Did you know almost every major psychology study has been impossible to replicate? Yet these studies are heavily relied on for treatment
PaintedSlate
That's a pretty sizeable overstep of the evidence, including on "almost every," "major," and "impossible." The pop-famous reproducibility
PaintedSlate
issues are very limited in scope and have little bearing on clinical research. Moreover, most "failures" to replicate don't mean that.
PaintedSlate
One effect was quantified here, and that should give a sense of the issue: http://m.pnas.org/content/113/23/6454.full
Steffn
Do you have a source on that?
PrincessDonaldTrumpBANNED2
http://www.zmescience.com/science/psychology-study-verification-27082015/ may or may not be the same study I was talking about.
Steffn
Thanks!
PaintedSlate
Once you get past the misleading clickbaity stuff, this is a nice article about the problem of replication.
NastyBert2000
Psychology isn't hard science like physics though. Brain knowledge needs big gains before high level analysis of behavior gets better too.
PrincessDonaldTrumpBANNED2
Let me rephrase it, a lot of major studies that were repeated resulted in different outcomes. Yet, we still stick to the original study.
NastyBert2000
Scientists are well aware of potential for errors. Systems are in place to correct for this, and those are also subject to revision.
NastyBert2000
However, if you're expecting perfection all the time, science or not, you will be disappointed. Science is always a work in progress.
n8crafter
For the field of psychology, perhaps that is true. For other fields the experiments have been replicated
PrincessDonaldTrumpBANNED2
I mentioned psychology in the first place, so I assumed we were still talking about it on this particular thread, but even outside psych
TonawandaBlue
That's how Republicans do science.
ArchmageTech
Democrats too as well as everyone else
TonawandaBlue
That's just it. This isn't Dems vs GOP. This is 99.8% of actual scientists vs the GOP
ArchmageTech
Ever hear the phrase "morons scream loudest?" Its not the entirety of the GOP. I don't know about you but I have seen plentry of democrats/>
ArchmageTech
>liberals/progressives fight against science articles containing opposing results of transgenders, the refugee crises, and a couple other>
TonawandaBlue
You don't have empirical scientific evidence opposing those issues you've cherry-picked.
PoliticalWanderer
BlufftonBob
Where do I get this shirt?
PoliticalWanderer
https://pro.teechip.com/sufs1 available for the next 15 hours only.
breadbench123
Oh god, I get downvoted, while that is is essence the definition of science, I think Imgur
breadbench123
's demographic is getting younger and dumber by the day
breadbench123
New theories disproof science from yesterday all the time, stop thinking of science as an absolute truth, that's not how science works...
PoliticalWanderer
1) Pray tell what from the shirt you think is wrong or disprovable. For the record, since you complain separately about downvotes, currently
PoliticalWanderer
2) I've downvoted you while what you say is true, the fact that you bring it up in this context makes it sound like you're saying stuff on
PoliticalWanderer
3) the shirt is wrong, when bout the only thing that isn't a hard simple fact is climate change, which has a ridiculous preponderance of
PoliticalWanderer
4) evidence in its favor. It may turn out to be wrong, but at the moment it certainly doesn't appear that way, and the science has held up
Moshugaani
I think the part about magic is a bit fishy :----)
tearsofkoolaid
Just remember ~500 years ago this shirt would have said "the earth is the center of the solar system".
PoliticalWanderer
1) 500 years ago Copernicus was at least working on mathematical proof that the Earth revolves around the sun. So science was on the right
PoliticalWanderer
2) side. Popular belief and authoritarian dogma on the other hand... which is a pretty good argument for why dogma and authoritarian leaders