Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by themitigating 1035 days ago
Who is "They"? Science is a practice not an organization. There's no pope or single church that has rules.

It's crazy your criticizing people for changing if new information comes out. That's the basis of science and why it's not like religon
1 comments
MrPatan 1034 days ago
If you don't let some information out in case it changes The Science, what then?
link
themitigating 1034 days ago
What does that mean to let some information out in case it changes?

Science doesn't change it's a process, a way of understanding the world.

link
MrPatan 1034 days ago
Ok.

I'll explain because there seems to be a genuine misunderstanding.

Of course the scientific method is great, and the only tool we have to understand the world. Of course. Very true.

"The Science", on the other hand, is a sales tool. Something to be invoked to push a product, a policy, whatever.

Science, the scientific method, the sum total of humanity's knowledge and wisdom, can't be stopped. It may be delayed, but truth wins because truth predicts the future, and lies don't.

But "The Science", that's different. Pay off a few key people at the right time, and you can get yourself a nice handy "The Science" to sell whatever it is you want to sell. It won't work forever, but it doesn't need to. By then they've already cashed out their shares, won the election, whatever.

link
themitigating 1034 days ago
"But "The Science", that's different. Pay off a few key people at the right time, and you can get yourself a nice handy"

If it's accurate how is this is a bad way to sell something? What's better? You're claiming that it can be corrupted, that applies to many things in life.

link
MrPatan 1034 days ago
Why is lying and censoring dissenting views a bad way to sell something? Because it destroys all trust we have in that institution, and now every time they try to push something again we have to wonder "What lies and censorship are they doing this time?"
link
themitigating 1034 days ago
Who is they? Why are you grouping all scientists as one?

Lying and censoring isn't a good way to sell something but that's has nothing to do with science nor can you place blame or reduce your trust across all scientists and scientific institutions.

It a reporter at NBC lies and gets caught why would that affect the reputation of a reporter at another news network? It shouldn't and if it does then explain why?

"Because it destroys all trust we have in that institution"

What institution? If a specific company, government agency, or educational institution is caught lying or censoring and the management knew about it, approved it, or didn't take reasonable steps to stop it then you should reduce your trust level for them.

BUT I don't see any specific one being mentioned. I see "science" and "The Science".

link