/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.15179213]

reminder that the overwhelming majority of all scientific publication is composed of lies which were contrived with bad intentions as false pretenses to achieve goals which could not be reached via honest means.

[Anonymous No.15179214]

>>15179213
THIS IS ABSOLUTELY FALSE! TAKE IT BACK RIGHT NOW YOU FUCKING RETARD!!!

[Anonymous No.15179230]

>>15179213
This is true, but it's more fault of the system and the higher ups financing the shit than the scientists doing the hard work.
The problem is that Academia, and even private research institutes, don't give a fuck about null hypothesis works, replication/verification studies or anything that doesn't fit the "flavor of the season" so there is little space for scientist to work in the way they should work.

[Anonymous No.15179233]

>>15179230
>This is true, but it's more fault of the system and the higher ups financing the shit than the scientists doing the hard work.
If the scientists weren't liars to begin with then there wouldn't need to be so much testing to check them for fraud.

[Anonymous No.15179237]

>>15179213
the main goal of the scientific enterprise is the advancement of your career (as per Nature, for example). publications is a main tool for that. what's the problem?

[Anonymous No.15179242]

>>15179233
They have to lie because they know is game over if their research is not doing what the higher ups are mandating, or if the results are against the narrative they are setting.

[Anonymous No.15179257]

>>15179233
if the scientists were faithful christians obedient to the ten commandments then they would not be liars to begin with

[Anonymous No.15179267]

>>15179230
>it's more fault of the system and the higher ups financing the shit than the scientists doing the hard work.
No, it is exclusively the fault of the """scientists""" shitting out an endless slew of non-reproducible bullshit studies.

[Anonymous No.15179506]

>>15179213
this should be one of the site banners representing /sci/

[Anonymous No.15179516]

>>15179213
Basically, soft sciences are trash. This has been well known for quite some time.

[Anonymous No.15179546]

>>15179516
>soft sciences
Soft sciences like pharmacology, medicine, biology etc.?

[Anonymous No.15179583]

>>15179546
Yeah.

[Anonymous No.15179599]

>>15179230
>This is true, but it's more fault of the system and the higher ups financing the shit than the scientists doing the hard work.

Nah, stop moralizing scientists. They are just people. Nothing stops them from being corrupt, stupid, greedy or selfish.

[Anonymous No.15179728]

Go back to your containment board, incel.

[Anonymous No.15179787]

>>15179213
>reminder that the overwhelming majority of all scientific publication is composed of lies which were contrived with bad intentions as false pretenses to achieve goals which could not be reached via honest means.

...in a perfectly accurate mirror of realty itself.

[Anonymous No.15179848]

>>15179213
>Therefore the bible is correct

[Anonymous No.15179854]

>>15179787
keyed

[Anonymous No.15179879]

>>15179213
which is why math is somewhat superior, you can't cheat for shit in that field. novel results are novel results, period

[Anonymous No.15179897]

>>15179728
Wrong thread?

[Anonymous No.15179899]

>>15179879
Mathematicians, even pure mathematicians, fudge details a lot too. The hope is that no inconsistencies are causing major damage behind the scenes.

[Anonymous No.15179904]

>>15179879
You can't cheat on maths but you can cheat on the application of them.
Besides a lot of the new theorems are purely suppositions that work only in abstractions. We don't really know if they could work in real life situations.

[Anonymous No.15179907]

>>15179237
>the main goal of the scientific enterprise is the advancement of your career
Wrong, it's the betterment of the human race.

[Anonymous No.15179991]

>>15179599
I won't say they are free of guilt, after all they are part of the whole mess. But the "Publish or Perish" system basically means they have no other options.

[Anonymous No.15180209]

>>15179230
>Scientists would never lie. They find the truth, and then their bosses lie about it.
And yet strangely they never blow the whistle on that.

[Anonymous No.15180456]

>>15179879
>yes, every single field of academic stem publishing is so plagued with fraudulence that dishonest publications outnumber decent ones by more than 2:1
>except for my field of course, my field is as pure and perfect as the driven snow
popular fantasy amongst those who have such low iqs that self reflection isn't possible

[Anonymous No.15181212]

>>15179991
so they willfully and without complaint choose to participate dishonestly in a system which they know is dishonest. how is that a justification.
>It's OK for me to steal because I choose to work in a dishonest casino
Wonderful people and expert logicians
>It's OK for me to fuck you in the ass because I'm a rapist

[Anonymous No.15182854]

>>15180209
People who got a mortgage to pay can't rock the boat at work

[Anonymous No.15183472]

>>15179907
naive. that poster is talking about how scientific enterprise works practically (at least in societies where science is dictated by profit motives and publish or perish crisis).
>>15181212
and what would you change about society to make this less of an issue?
>>15179213
publishers are shit but they're the only places that people who know their shit get their shit published. much more scientific than reductionist internet videos that are obviously made by dumbasses who are incapable of reading a textbook.
prefer open access and use sci-hub for paywalled papers. open access has its flaws but its less bullshit than publishers like elsevier.

[Anonymous No.15183480]

>>15183472
>and what would you change about society to make this less of an issue?
Kill everyone who talks about science but doesn't know what "falsifiable" means.

[Anonymous No.15183491]

I bet that most normies believe that the results of papers are actually verified somehow.

[Anonymous No.15183493]

>>15183491
They believe that peer review involves replication. It's hilarious.

[Anonymous No.15183511]

>>15183480
I don't think that would be enough. basics of Popper's falsfiability is probably taught in undergrad. I think the issue is that these authors do not give a shit about what they are writing enough to care about falsifiability. There is no passion in modern science, it's all retards scammed into thinking that they could make a living off writing retarded papers.
The true scientists are the ones passionate about their field and publishers kill passion.

[Anonymous No.15183512]

>>15183511
If we end peer review passion will return to science.

[Anonymous No.15183516]

>>15183511
Bad science isn't the end of the world if you kill most politicians and all journalists.

[Anonymous No.15183528]

>>15183512
If you end peer review you kill science.
The real way is to accelerate technology to post scarcity. After that nobody can hold the money leash over anybody and people can research, publish, call bs whatever they want.

[Anonymous No.15183543]

>>15183528
>If you end peer review you kill science.
The greatest era of scientific progress occurred before peer review existed.

[Anonymous No.15183560]

>>15179213
Please give some examples

[Anonymous No.15183575]

>>15179213
Isn't this mostly a problem in the social and medical sciences? It leaks into everything a bit. By far though social and medical sciences are quackery.

[Anonymous No.15183579]

>>15183575
Science publicizers want you to think that to minimize the damage, but it's actually prevalent across all disciplines. Chemistry has an extremely low rate of replication and rampant fraud, especially in the realm of materials science.

[Anonymous No.15183587]

>>15183560
>Deepfake pioneer to lose two papers after misconduct finding of faked data
https://retractionwatch.com/2023/01/30/exclusive-deepfake-pioneer-to-lose-two-papers-after-misconduct-finding/
He wasn't as good at faking data as his job title says he is supposed to be

[Anonymous No.15183595]

>>15183575
the disciplines that have the most mathematical skill are the ones that are best at using that skill deceptively. social sciences midwits get their frauds called out by high school students, physics frauds take a lot more education to figure out.

[Anonymous No.15183601]

>>15183595
Most of the math heavy sciences are esoteric anyway. I can hardly blame scientists for exploiting a broken system though. This society prioritises profit over wisdom.

[Anonymous No.15183668]

>>15179230
>The problem is that Academia,
>after free college

No...no, sir.

[Anonymous No.15183713]

>>15183668
nothing in that post advocated for free college. you made that leap to justify your dismissal of the post wholesale because it doesn't fit your preconceived notions.
publish or perish is a real phenomenon that incentivizes poor (but seemingly real) science to be published through organizations as well as h-index hacking to fake impact. you may argue that science under a more social democratic system is going to be worse but it doesn't change the fact that publish or perish is a real phenomenon and that publishers are scummy (which is why authors are sometimes privy to giving you their papers if you email them).

[Anonymous No.15183717]

>>15183713
If we put a permanent stop to peer review then the rush to publish will cease. Ideas will need to stand on their own merits.

[Anonymous No.15183718]

>>15183713
>you made that leap
Wrong, government backed student loan shitshow, I was there...clearly you were not.

Didnt read the rest, stay in reality.

[Anonymous No.15183727]

>>15183717
do you know if the majority of journals even have peer review as a prerequisite? why dont journals that dont require peer review (i imagine vixra doesnt require peer review) overtake more esteemed journals?
>>15183718
then tell me why publish or perish exists and how this would mysteriously be fixed under the free market.

[Anonymous No.15183732]

>>15183727
>do you know if the majority of journals even have peer review as a prerequisite? why dont journals that dont require peer review (i imagine vixra doesnt require peer review) overtake more esteemed journals?
Peer reviewed journal publications are often mandated for tenure track positions. It's a kind of gatekeeping to preserve the status quo in a field. Eliminate the gate and you eliminate a major pressure towards fraud.

[Anonymous No.15183733]

>>15183727
>then tell me why publish or perish exists
Because trust the badge.
>how this would mysteriously be fixed under the free market
When doctors say counter-medical advice they get in trouble, but instead they become the highest paid government employee...

This was intentional, the results of this were known before it began, you fight an intergenerational enemy that has been working against you since the beginning of time.

[Anonymous No.15183772]

>>15183491
>>15183493
I don't blame normies for that, because things should be exactly like that.

[Anonymous No.15183824]

>>15183772
Since it isn't, peer review must be abolished.

[Anonymous No.15183848]

Yes, and? Only those which actually work should be embraced.

[Anonymous No.15183871]

>>15183575
>>15179546
>Female dominated fields are always scientifically bankrupt
Probably a coincidence

[Anonymous No.15183878]

And yet here you are, interacting with a device that requires multiple scientific principles in order for your shitpost to be displayed to others. Curious!

[Anonymous No.15183886]

>>15183732
attempting to eliminate the temptation to cheat as a means of preventing people with bad morals from acting on their instincts is just a way of pussyfooting around solving the problems which will inevitably be caused by people with bad morals. if the soientists can't advance themselves by colluding at peer review then they will busy themselves finding other ways to fraudulently forward themselves, they've already demonstrated their inability to succeed honestly, they're never going to come to heel and behave no matter what the rules are, that would be suicide for them because they can't compete on an honest basis, thats why they started lying and cheating to begin with. instead of eliminating temptation, eliminate those who are unable to resist it and solve the problem completely rather than kick the can down the road. pol pot wiped out the entire soientist class in his country and cambodia suffered no negative consequences, its nearly 50 years after the cambodian soietistocaust and cambodia is a popular vacation destination.

[Anonymous No.15183972]

The main problem is that Academia is almost totally reliant on government budget and gibs to exist. The Academia should be its own totally independent thing, with its own privileges and prerogatives, like Church is, separated from the retards in the government.

[Anonymous No.15183998]

>>15183972
It literally is all the things you mentioned. Most funding is private and even the public funding is distributed by academics, not bureaucrats

[Anonymous No.15184919]

>>15183998
People distributing funding are tautologically bureaucrats. What makes you believe they're doing academics when they're not distributing funding?

[Anonymous No.15184936]

>>15183878
digital data transmission was invented by a portait artist, punchcard computing was originate by the parisian fashion industry. computers run on the principals from the arts, not the sciences.

[Anonymous No.15185537]

>>15179213
didn't used to be like that, but it sure is like that these days. its the new normal, its progress. we're in the post-truth era now

[Anonymous No.15186554]

>>15179213
same can be said of just about every media source these days

[Anonymous No.15186708]

>>15183878
Yes and? Your statement is not in conflict with the topic of this thread.
Yes, we live in a technological era, but we are far from our true potential. I mean, I keep hearing since like 10 years ago about graphene and other super materials that could make technology better and cheaper, yet nothing has happened since then.

[Anonymous No.15187349]

>>15186708
>I mean, I keep hearing since like 10 years ago about graphene and other super materials that could make technology better and cheaper, yet nothing has happened since then.
thats just jewish media propaganda, ghislaine maxwell pushed tons of popsci lies on reddit when she was boss of the site, which was up to the moment she was arrested in 2020. the reddit soience cooomers then spread the popsci lies to the rest of the internet. stupid jewish soience propaganda spreads out quickly like a tenacious computer virus once the reddit retards get a hold of it.

[Anonymous No.15187365]

>>15183871
>Probably a coincidence
I hate women but it unironically is.
Those are the sciences that are more easily exploited for political purposes, business or for clicks on websites, so they are inherently subject to corruption.
Mathematics doesn't sell, and physics can only sell when it actually works, so there is not much to gain when lying about those.

[Anonymous No.15187370]

THIS WAS ONLY TRUE FOR PSYCHOLOGY PAPERS. IT WAS NOT TRUE IN ANY OF THE 3 HARD SCIENCE FIELDS (physics, chemistry, biology) NOR ANY FIELDS DIRECTLY BASED ON THEM (medicine, geology, astronomy, etc)

You fucking retards don't know what you're talking about

[Anonymous No.15187374]

>>15179516
>>15179546
>>15179583
pharmacology, medicine, and biology are hard sciences, retards

[Anonymous No.15187572]

>>15187365
>I hate women but it unironically is.
>the sexes are equal, they're the same thing, they have no differentiable behavioral characteristics or inherent intellectual differences, their brains are identical even if they're different sizes and shapes
>men = women
>i can't tell the difference between men and women
>i can't tell if i'm a man or a woman

[Anonymous No.15188283]

>>15187365
>and physics can only sell when it actually works
Physics has also a problem of replication. I am not saying the scientists are lying, but the results of one lab barely match with other ones. Worse when such labs are some super specialized advanced facilites, like CERN.

[Anonymous No.15188289]

If you don't have at least a masters I don't have to take you seriously
If you don't have a bachelors I don't have to consider you human

[Anonymous No.15188303]

>>15188283
Multiple runs at the same lab don't always produce the same results. It's chaos out there and laymen don't know how bad it really is.

[Anonymous No.15188352]

>>15179213
Take your meds, schizo.

[Anonymous No.15188547]

>>15184936
Absolute midwit take.

[Anonymous No.15189158]

>>15183512
The problem is not passion, but money.

[Anonymous No.15190523]

>>15183512
Passion won't pay their bills

[Anonymous No.15190527]

>>15189158
>>15190523
If we end peer review then there will be no gatekeeping of who gets published. People with innovative ideas will earn professorships by merit, while regurgitators and frauds will fail and leave the job market.

[Anonymous No.15190590]

>>15183733
>This was intentional, the results of this were known before it began, you fight an intergenerational enemy that has been working against you since the beginning of time.

This. What most in this thread don't understand is that the current state of science was by design. Ex MI5 agent John Coleman says in one of his books that one of the goals of the elites is 'the death of science'.

[Anonymous No.15190619]

>>15183543
academic peer review creates institutional inertia and strongly favors the creation and preservation of dogma

the actual scientific value of peer review comes from public discourse. limiting the scope of peers and reviews to insular, "approved" individuals mired in the same dogmatic structures is a recipe for accumulating and seldom purging dishonesty in service of self promotion or institutional promotion

reality will dismiss nonsense - nothing else is qualified to, no matter how many "sCiEnCe cOmMuNiCaTiOn" courses it takes

[Anonymous No.15190716]

My upper left abdomen has had these nerve sensations and tensing with emotions and there's skin abnormalities on the same area (moles, red spot/cherry mole, single hairs growing more). Could they be related? What made me think more about it was the starting of abnormal tingling appearing out of nowhere on my penis and after a couple of months a red spot appeared on the foreskin so a skin abnormality with a similar issue

[Anonymous No.15190736]

>>15190619

[Anonymous No.15190752]

>>15190619
This is not true. There are people who still believe that the earth is flat.
The only people against peer review are cranks like electric universe schizos and evolution deniers.

[Anonymous No.15190779]

>>15190752
flat earth is a psyop created by and for glowniggers

[Anonymous No.15190789]

>>15190752
>The only people against peer review are cranks like electric universe schizos and evolution deniers.
See >>15185537

[Anonymous No.15190821]

>>15179213
>reminder that the overwhelming majority of all scientific publication is composed of lies which were contrived with bad intentions as false pretenses to achieve goals which could not be reached via honest means.
Obvious truth
Also, government controls them and the release of information now, for government's benefit.

[Anonymous No.15190825]

>>15190779
>flat earth is a psyop created by and for glowniggers
correct. it's so childish and transparent, just like all glownigs and leftist authoritarians are.

[Anonymous No.15190913]

>>15179213
>post 1960s critical theory academy "science"

There fixed that

[Anonymous No.15190956]

>>15190825
they regularly spam it on this board and then censor everyone who points out whats going on

[Anonymous No.15191048]

>>15190716
you are probably feeling your shit pass through the splenic flexure (the part of your large intestine that curves down toward your anus - the hepatic flexure is the one on the right side)

[Anonymous No.15191057]

>>15179213
>reminder that the overwhelming majority of all scientific publication is composed of lies
It's a good thing man. Imagine this fucked up race (UShitholers at 1st who through nuclear bombs on civilians) were able to get real knowledge.

[Anonymous No.15191546]

>>15191048
thanks but definitely not, the bigger question was the relationship of the skin abnormalities as they seem too coincidental tto be at the exact positions of the issues. also shit doesn't pass through penis

[Anonymous No.15191554]

>>15191057

[Anonymous No.15191607]

>>15191546
refferred pain from diaphragm to penis or vice versa is quite common

[Anonymous No.15191896]

>>15190716
Another issue I've had is the episodical tingling, drying, dandruffing and irritation of my face and scalp that started a few years ago. From photographs it can be seen my face got older faster since it started and also hair loss. The skin turgor on my face is poor. The face issue might start at the same time as the other problems at a precise time of the day. But it is also more on going.

[Anonymous No.15192486]

>>15191057
>UShitholers at 1st who through nuclear bombs on civilians
They deserved it, though

[Anonymous No.15192944]

>>15191057
>>15192486
Japan is so goddamn lucky it was the US with the nukes and not anyone else
they had good historical reasons to think an opponent saying "surrender and we'll stop attacking" was lying - if it was anyone other than the US they might've been right

[Anonymous No.15192964]

>>15192944
and today, nearly a century after the fact, japan is bugman paradise, a helpless neutered vassal state who's endemic culture are going to wiped out of existence by the demanding need for diversity. the japanese prime minister announced only yesterday that japan is in desperate need for diversity and it wasn't anyone in japan who influenced him to say that.

[Anonymous No.15193078]

>>15192486
why? because they were preventing mao from taking over china?

[Anonymous No.15193160]

>>15183878
Our current system works, but it is grossly sub-optimal.

[Anonymous No.15193324]

Science before peer review was essentially blogging, where you were roasted if your report was full of holes and you were intensely eyed with suspicion if your data and analysis techniques were opaque.
Science with peer review is essentially propaganda, where editorial committees with conflicts of interest against countervailing opinion decide what's fit for publication and actively shape the scientific "consensus" much like the news media shapes public opinion. Review by the editorial board provides cover to not publish your data beyond charts and appendices and to only vaguely describe your analysis, using their review as proof of confidence.

[Anonymous No.15193647]

>>15193078
>because they were preventing mao from taking over china?
Retard

[Anonymous No.15193685]

>>15193324

[Anonymous No.15194281]

>>15183848
And how do you know something works or not? That's the issue here.

[Anonymous No.15194627]

When peers do the peer review process, what exactly are they reviewing? Are they just reviewing the final paper such as can be read by regular plebs on Science Journals? Or are they performing a deeper review of all the data and analysis and methods and reasoning that was used to create the final paper?

[Anonymous No.15194785]

>>15194627
They just read the paper. The data is almost never checked.

[Anonymous No.15194830]

>>15194785
That's absurd. What's happens to the data and other background information after a paper is published? Does the journal in question save in an archive somewhere? Or does is it just lost to time?

[Anonymous No.15194837]

>>15194830
If your lucky the journal has an archive, but that's rare. Usually you need to demand the raw data from the paper's authors, and when you do they could simply refuse or say it was deleted.

[Anonymous No.15194855]

>>15194830
the journals literally never see it
nobody but the authors ever have access to it; the paper just contains their conclusions and an incomplete description of their methods/reasoning

science requires publicly accessible data

academia is absolutely fucked right now if you haven't noticed

>>15183878
it should be telling that the "multiple scientific principles" relevant to this statement that enable such devices were combined and tested by engineers, and are technically re-tested by every working device - in most cases BEFORE the "scientific principles" were formalized

engineers (and experimentalists, who are also to some extent engineers; engineers are to some extent experimentalists, too) are actual scientists - the intellectual output of "pure" scientists (theorists) is precisely as theoretical as its medium even when its conclusions are compatible with experiment. until thusly tested, it's not science - just a framework for pontificators to suggest ideas to the actual scientists of the world and claim credit for things that would operate regardless of their pontifications.

every time a particle physicist claims credit for electronics because their standard model has electrons in it i get a little bit more pissed

[Anonymous No.15195248]

>>15187374
'hard science' means nothing more than you believe a science is legit. it is not a meaningful label. and those sciences are bullshit. i mean it's better than fucking sociology and linguistics but that isn't saying much.

[Anonymous No.15195253]

>>15195248
Linguistics is actually scientific because you can formulate laws of language and compute linguistic elements to decode ancient languages.

[Anonymous No.15195260]

>>15187365
no it's because they're much harder than mathematics and physics. and physics has plenty of problems too. indeed, its simplicity and amenability to mathematics makes it go off the rails. still in a much better position than the others if physicists like all scientists weren't retarded about it.

[Anonymous No.15195281]

>>15183579
engineers and theory-nonconforming experimentalists always win in the end because scientists cannot stop LYING

[Anonymous No.15195282]

>>15195281
Agreed.

[Anonymous No.15195284]

>>15183727
>(i imagine vixra doesnt require peer review) overtake more esteemed journals?
propaganda, prestige, money. the system is part of the wider establishment system as well so who will the rest defer to and promote

[Anonymous No.15195309]

>>15195253
no you can't.
for starters language is in its meaning not its form. you can't somehow get meaning from form. and those ancient languages are reconstructed (rather imperfectly and not definitively) by using a reference point (other languages) along with having a lot of surviving text. it's the same as proto-languages except you can't just make up shit and actually have text to conform it to. no one will ever be able to flawlessly tell exactly what the meaning is / meaning intended of any text in any language, but for these ancient reconstructed languages it is not just some ambiguity and careful interpretation, it's barely getting any definitive meaning at all. that is, a range that fits countless meanings invented by people today (i.e. none are necessarily accurate).

[Anonymous No.15195344]

>>15195309
meaning in language is form + mind. including lexicon in form here because it is essentially recall labels and follows form. you don't have the right mind because it is long dead or changed. so you try to think your way into it. the problem is you don't know, can't know. and you can't separate your mind from it his attempt. so the meaning you create from this ancient form is essentially your own mind, not theirs, with some simulatory reasoned amendment that you don't know is right and in any case may not be capable of wholly and NATIVELY executing (as it is only reasoned after all).

[Anonymous No.15195370]

>>15195309
>>15195344
also when it comes to definitive meaning, meaning is not reducible to some taxonomy of simple dictionary definitions. it's a lot more complicated and conveys a lot on its own as well as uniquely in combination, patterns themselves convey their own meaning. so it is not possible to find meaning by thinking oh this word means dog and that word means god (uh oh! no one has any definitive idea of what the very simple meaning of this word is either much less its full meaning in use of the language).

[Anonymous No.15195685]

Not my research, nigger.

Captcha related:
>Kys, Gay

[Anonymous No.15195943]

i wonder what the total cost of all this replication crisis "science" is, must be trillions.

[Anonymous No.15195946]

>>15195943
The profits of lying to the world are counted in the tens of trillions. Vaccinology alone is over $1 trillion in revenue.