Re:The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bri...
by balabaster on Monday March 18, 2019 @04:33PM
(#19424969)
Sorry, I wasn't trying to make that a political statement about Monsanto. They're just an easy name to pluck out of the air because they have a few known controversial studies to make a point. It wasn't supposed to suggest that Monsanto was evil or that the science wasn't legit. All I'm saying is that if ACME Co. funds a study that suggests ACME Co. are good, then the test results look pretty sketchy.
> A few month later the new evidence refute the paper, and people get the idea that scientific discovers are not reliable.
And do this a few dozen times and people stop listening to science because they know a couple of months from now, this study is going to be refuted.
Re:The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bri...
by jimbokun on Monday March 18, 2019 @07:47PM
(#19426543)
Remarkable how often the answer to headlines ending in a question mark is "no". Counter examples seem exceedingly rare.
Re:The rise and fall of scientific authority, and how to bri...
by laretluval on Monday March 18, 2019 @11:08PM
(#19427744)
If the answer were yes they would phrase it as a statement, not a question.
* Is 'Oumuamua an alien spacehip / solar sail?
* Does the Tabby's star have a alien megastructure / partial Dyson sphere?
You can't blame to Monsanto for them.
The article appears, get a huge press coverage, the authors get interviewed, and somewhere the fact that it's only an improbable weird hypothesis is lost.
A few month later the new evidence refute the paper, and people get the idea that scientific discovers are not reliable.
(And there are batteries breakthrough that increase your battery capacity a 80% before disappearing, nutrition recommendation that get reversed after a few years, ... but these are more motivated for money.)