Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 22:29:30 UTC No. 16194876

why have there never been vaccine trials with untreated controls?
seems kind of sketchy

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 23:13:47 UTC No. 16194929

>>16194866
>accepted by the scientific community
where did you read that? Genuine question.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 23:45:07 UTC No. 16194990

>>16194929
Fraud is rampant and nobody in the sciences ever complains about it or seems to even care.

Anonymous at Sun, 26 May 2024 23:48:39 UTC No. 16194995

>>16194990
it's a feature. it's like to join the communist party, you have to be corrupt so they have something over you and know they can control you.
in some fields like social sciences or some fake transcattle research etc..., in order to progress the academia ladder, you have to join the cult and commit some fraud but not so obvious and not too stupid so that everyone know you did some fraud but nobody outside the cult bother ratting you out because it takes efforts. however, the people in the cult now know they have control over you and can trust you to never betray their tribe.

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 20:10:44 UTC No. 16196369

>>16194990
scientists are professional fraud artists, their job is to mislead people

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 20:17:29 UTC No. 16196385

modern science and medicine contrary to accepted belief are not actually based on rigoourous examinations of the natural worlkd.

The old discipline of natural philosophy was but science "replaced" it

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 21:13:04 UTC No. 16196507

>>16194866
>Are scientists fundamentally dishonest people?
Atheists are fundamentally dishonest people

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 22:55:15 UTC No. 16196718

>>16194990
>Fraud is rampant and nobody in the sciences ever complains about it or seems to even care.
Really? I'm asking because I observe exactly the opposite: people know about the problem, shit, you know about the problem, /poltards know about the problem, and obviously scientists know about the problem too and many do discuss it, but solving it is the hard part.
Unfortunately, science isn't a full-time hobby, you have to be rich for that. For professional scientists, science is a job to pay the bills, and people in dire financial straits will sometimes resort to fraud to get by another day, just like in any other industry out there where people have to count pennies to pay their bills. Add to that some rare cases of extreme ego narcissism fraud among top researchers (but rarely since being caught implies a ruined career and a demolished narcissist), and you have the perfect storm, like in any other industry.

How do you solve that problem"? I'm not sure anon, I really am not. It's almost as if people should do what they love and not what they have to do, but that's not the society we live in. Hey, at least many still do amateur science, out of love.
Fortunately much of the work of science ifs verification, and fraud does get detected, much of it, that's how we know there is much of it, as you know yourself. So, in conclusion: science works, just not as efficiently as we would hope.

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 23:01:51 UTC No. 16196728

>>16196718
>science isn't a full-time hobby, you have to be rich for that.
As it should be today. Poors corrupt science

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 23:13:37 UTC No. 16196745

>>16196718
It's also important to point out that in addition to being aware of the problem, many researchers *are* taking action. Part of the reason that research fraud has been popularized as a topic in the news is because of how many researchers are actively looking out for and reporting signs of fraud (or even just mistaken results).

Anonymous at Mon, 27 May 2024 23:49:48 UTC No. 16196779

>>16194866
>accepted by the scientific community

not at all lmao, it's more propagated by the journals.

the journal of the american chemical society, for example, will essentially skip over the peer review process if you have enough reputation lmao. if you're in the chemistry research community, you'd know that they get an increasing barrage of shit for doing this over time

"those with high h-indexes get higher h-indexes"