Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 05/02/2022 12:32:00 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: nickcarraway

Good article.

This is why almost all of “social science” is ^%$, btw.

It is virtually impossible to go back in time and replicate initial conditions so almost all claims are impossible to verify using the scientific method.


2 posted on 05/02/2022 12:34:49 PM PDT by cgbg (A kleptocracy--if they can keep it. Think of it as the Cantillon Effect in action.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nickcarraway

“John Ioannidis of Stanford University”

He’s famous for this eye opening paper.

Why most published research findings are false
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16060722/

And caught hell from the establishment for publishing this.

John Ioannidis: COVID Deaths Massively Over-counted
https://covidcalltohumanity.org/2021/09/30/john-ioannidis-covid-deaths-massively-over-counted/


4 posted on 05/02/2022 12:58:46 PM PDT by jimwatx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nickcarraway

Junk science is perpetuated by “peer reviewed” rather than “peer replicated” science studies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


5 posted on 05/02/2022 1:24:58 PM PDT by RetiredTexasVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nickcarraway

If you can not reproduce the orginal data the first data is void. Or as my wise grandfather said, “It is Bull S—t.

Many of our professional journals will publish non reproduced conclusions of a theory based on politics and not science. Thus they are purveyors of intentional disinformation.

When I was in geology and later pharmacy if a grad student did such he would have been shown the door. Sadly this is not done today.

1. Theory
2. Prove the theory
3. Repeat again to make sure you can reproduce the proof of the theory
4. Have peers repeat it and if the same results publish
5. Once published others will also repeat the study
6. If they come up with the same results it is very probably valid.

The vast majority of our past scientific journals of great, are no more. If it is pure science with no political gain it is pretty good. If the subject has political ramifications, just stop reading it. It will not be true.

Scientific America
National Geographic (their maps are even political)
Britain’s Royal Society
All science programs from the media particularly BBC
and many others have committed suicide as professional journals.


6 posted on 05/02/2022 1:38:18 PM PDT by cpdiii (CANE CUTTER-DECKHAND-ROUGHNECK-OILFIELD CONSULTANT-GEOLOGIST-PILOT-PHARMACIST )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nickcarraway

The science used to be real science.
Now it is what they want to be. Boys can be girls, we have only 9 years to go,...


7 posted on 05/02/2022 3:36:45 PM PDT by AZJeep (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0AHQkryIIs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: nickcarraway

Bump


8 posted on 05/06/2022 6:44:13 AM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson