4 ms·
There is two problems here : 1- there is a difference between being wrong and being fraud. Einstein was wrong in a paper claiming that gravitational waves are
by bluish29 3y ago
There is two problems here :
1- there is a difference between being wrong and being fraud. Einstein was wrong in a paper claiming that gravitational waves are not real (he was convinced later it is). He did not fabricate anything in this work. He did not invent equations, made up observation data ...etc.
2- You are talking about conclusions and belief. Here is the problem, there is a scientific method. If you want to draw conclusions, then you have to follow that. You provide evidence. If you think this is fraud because the conclusion doesn't fit then you need to argue with better models/data or interpretation but not just based on final result that you don't like.
If you believe that everything contradicts flat earth is fraudulent then you are basically making up stuff and you don't have proof and this is defamation not science.
- goodSteveramos 3y agoIf you criminalize people’s incorrect beliefs then you are doing politics and not science.
- thinkingtoilet 3y agoCorrect. And 99% of climate change denial is politics and not science.
- goodSteveramos 3y agoRight, as is fining them millions of dollars for disagreeing with you. I’m honestly fine with that, my complaint is the hypocrisy of conflating political actions with science.
- bluish29 3y agoI really wonder if you read the article or not. This is not about disagreement or opinions. This is about fraud claims > with skeptics claiming Mann manipulated data. Investigations by Penn State and others found no misuse of data by Mann, but his work continued to draw attacks, particularly from conservatives. As an example. You solved a problem and I see that you solution is wrong (whether I am correct or not ia irrelevant) I would say you are wrong because you did this and that. I will not say that you are wrong because you have cheated unless I have a proof that you actually cheated (i.e data manipulation)
- goodSteveramos 3y agoDon’t be coy. This isn’t about one academic falsely accusing another of faking a specific measurement. This is a political activist calling an entire field of research fraudulent because its conclusions don’t conform to his political beliefs. Its outrageous and indefensible but living in a free country means people are allowed to believe and express outrageous and indefensible things.
- bluish29 3y agoYou can have a belief that this is wrong result based on nothing. If you want to say that this is fraudulent then you have to prove that this is fraud. There is a difference as I said in my comment.
- goodSteveramos 3y agoThats not how anything in science works. You should be able to express your beliefs without having absolute proof and get fined if a court doesn't agree with you.
- bluish29 3y agoActually if we are talking about science and not freedom of speech. Technically you are wrong, to work in science you have to follow scientific method and publish your conclusions with your methods, data and models.. etc. You can say whatever you want within this framework. A significant portion of the publications in any field is found wrong later sometimes by the authors themselves. But claiming that a work is fraud is not ab opinion. Actually even disagreeing between actual scientists usually comes in form of other work proving the other work is wrong. Welcome to the scientific community.
- arrrg 3y agoSaying “this is wrong” is very different from saying “this is fraud”. Why is it so hard for you to tell the difference? You never even need to engage with the question of whether something is fraud when disputing something. If you say that there are 75 million people living in Germany I don’t need to call you a lier or a fraud to say that you are wrong and dispute your statement. That‘s just not necessary. I can just point at this website https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Society-Environment/Population/Current-Population/_node.html https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Society-Environment/Popula... and say you are wrong. What do I care whether you simply misremembered, go wrong information from someone else and believed them or are actively lying.
- add-sub-mul-div 3y agoAre you unaware/pretending to be unaware that words are tools that can be used to commit crimes, or do you sincerely believe that any words that can be possibly strung together are or should be protected free speech that supersedes all other rights of others and legal responsibilities of yours? What is it about saying the word "politics" that erases all of that?