4 ms·

I think having standards around what sources are acceptable is sort of a required feature if you want to be a reliable source of facts. There will always be peo

I think having standards around what sources are acceptable is sort of a required feature if you want to be a reliable source of facts. There will always be people upset that their particular worldview doesn't fit in a place that is trying to be a factual description of reality. If you're upset about eastern medicine not being taken seriously enough do some double blind properly constructed studies showing why it's effective. If it isn't effective don't expect it to be taken seriously as medicine.

timbo1642 5y ago
You completely missed the point. COMPLETELY. The reality is that tons of studies are faked daily and "facts" change based on politics. Also big companies and powerful people have their info changed. Like Kamala Harris who had all the negative shit she did removed before the election. For example locking innocent people in jail and not letting them go when she knew they were innocent.
- atatatat 5y ago
  Negative shit, liiiiike for/with which company?
- phatfish 5y ago
  That sounds like a Trumpian oversimplification designed to be a character assassination attempt.
no_time 5y ago
The sad reality is that the scientific methods are just as corrupt and misleading as any other source. There are countless articles on these so called "peer reviewed" articles being accepted without single person even reading the abstract. My all time favorite is[0] [0]:https://www.vox.com/2014/11/21/7259207/scientific-paper-scam https://www.vox.com/2014/11/21/7259207/scientific-paper-scam
- IfOnlyYouKnew 5y ago
  Some five-year-old stunt doesn’t proof anything, least of all that there is any alternative. What would you replace peer review with? Some guy publishing straight-into-camera rants on YouTube?
  - no_time 5y ago
    >Some five-year-old stunt doesn’t proof anything If they haven't spotted such a blatant mistake do you think they will spot subtle lies that have been inserted on purpose to sway opinion/serve as ammo for some journalist who knows its audience can be misled by merely mentioning its a study from an "academic journal". I don't know the solution to be honest. What I know however is that unless you are an expert in a topic, your chances of knowing what's true and what's not is very slim.
    - gus_massa 5y ago
      There are good journals with a strict vetting process and there are predatory journals where the "peer review" is just a rubber stamp iif you pay the publication fees. And there are many levels in between. So in an Internet discussion, I try to use "published in a serious peer review journal". But it's very difficult to know if a journal is serious unless you are an specialist in that area. There are indices that somewhat measure the quality, but for example a citation index or 1.5 is a lot in Math but low in Physics, so you don't know unless you are an specialist in the area. There are tricks that are useful to detect bad journals, like looking at the rest of the articles published in the journal. A lot of single author articles is a red flag. Weird titles like "Using General relativity to prove that Sunspots are Conscious" is another red flag.
      - forcry 5y ago
        >There are good journals with a strict vetting process This is a myth. Vetting process cannot help if the persons involved are corrupt. Getting a "good reputation" might be just the first step in the journey to corruption.
  - 5y ago

timbo1642 5y ago

You completely missed the point. COMPLETELY. The reality is that tons of studies are faked daily and "facts" change based on politics. Also big companies and powerful people have their info changed. Like Kamala Harris who had all the negative shit she did removed before the election. For example locking innocent people in jail and not letting them go when she knew they were innocent.

atatatat 5y ago
Negative shit, liiiiike for/with which company?
phatfish 5y ago
That sounds like a Trumpian oversimplification designed to be a character assassination attempt.

no_time 5y ago

The sad reality is that the scientific methods are just as corrupt and misleading as any other source. There are countless articles on these so called "peer reviewed" articles being accepted without single person even reading the abstract. My all time favorite is[0] [0]:https://www.vox.com/2014/11/21/7259207/scientific-paper-scam https://www.vox.com/2014/11/21/7259207/scientific-paper-scam

IfOnlyYouKnew 5y ago
Some five-year-old stunt doesn’t proof anything, least of all that there is any alternative. What would you replace peer review with? Some guy publishing straight-into-camera rants on YouTube?
- no_time 5y ago
  >Some five-year-old stunt doesn’t proof anything If they haven't spotted such a blatant mistake do you think they will spot subtle lies that have been inserted on purpose to sway opinion/serve as ammo for some journalist who knows its audience can be misled by merely mentioning its a study from an "academic journal". I don't know the solution to be honest. What I know however is that unless you are an expert in a topic, your chances of knowing what's true and what's not is very slim.
  - gus_massa 5y ago
    There are good journals with a strict vetting process and there are predatory journals where the "peer review" is just a rubber stamp iif you pay the publication fees. And there are many levels in between. So in an Internet discussion, I try to use "published in a serious peer review journal". But it's very difficult to know if a journal is serious unless you are an specialist in that area. There are indices that somewhat measure the quality, but for example a citation index or 1.5 is a lot in Math but low in Physics, so you don't know unless you are an specialist in the area. There are tricks that are useful to detect bad journals, like looking at the rest of the articles published in the journal. A lot of single author articles is a red flag. Weird titles like "Using General relativity to prove that Sunspots are Conscious" is another red flag.
    - forcry 5y ago
      >There are good journals with a strict vetting process This is a myth. Vetting process cannot help if the persons involved are corrupt. Getting a "good reputation" might be just the first step in the journey to corruption.
- 5y ago