Views on Science/Scientists/Scientism (Split from Is the MCO Real?)

[liminal_luke]

28 minutes ago, Cobie said:

Don’t deny yourself, let your bitterness rip,   online it’s harmless. Is that ‘science believer’ your annoying brother again?

 

Not my brother, a friend.  And in reality he´s a sweet guy and I don´t wish him any harm.  Just someone who got caught up, as so many of us do, in a particular mind loop.

 

20 minutes ago, Apech said:

Science is nice,

and science can stop you,

From doing all the things in life you’d like to.

 

If there’s something you’d like to try,

If there’s something you’d like to try,

Ask me I won’t say no how could I?

 

 

For brother Apech

 

He´s a cool white cat,

who knows where it´s at.

He´s done lots of Egyptian study,

I´m lucky he´s my buddy.

 

Edited Thursday at 06:06 PM by liminal_luke

[Nungali]

16 hours ago, Taomeow said:

The thread this one got split from was about LIFE sciences.  And of course went as those topics always do:

 

1) When someone talks about the problems with LIFE sciences, the self-appointed defenders of science bring up TECHNOLOGY as proof of progress of SCIENCE. 

Technology, indeed, is booming and blooming, but this does not inform one of the state of affairs with life sciences. 

You want to know the state of affairs with their progress that made any positive difference in the lives of live humans?     

The last time life sciences made progress was in the 19th century when they stopped bashing the concept of hygiene and ridiculing and ostracizing surgeons who wanted to wash their hands before performing surgeries.  And no longer put them in lunatic asylums for this crazy idea that infant and new mothers' mortality may have something to do with the fact that they dissect corpses for scientific purposes and then move on to delivering babies without washing their hands.

 

 2) There's countless irresponsible endeavors in current LIFE sciences which the people currently called scientists do JUST BECAUSE THEY CAN, and most of them are extremely destructive to the health and well-being of actual live human beings and all creatures great and small.  The bulk of tangible progress is in weaponized applications.  Purportedly against the potential enemy.  In reality, innocent bystanders who are affected are pretty much everybody on the planet.  

 

3) This extinction-level status quo is entrenched so firmly and the indoctrination runs so deep, and is so all-encompassing, that talking not only with its perpetrators but also with its victims is usually an exercise in futility.      

 

 

I guess many here would not count vaccines as an improvement  ....   but I would cite 'non invasive  diagnosis  '  (like ultrasound )   and insulin  for diabetics .   Fortunately for me though , I am neither diabetic nor pregnant . 

[Taomeow]

2 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

 

Not my brother, a friend.  And in reality he´s a sweet guy and I don´t wish him any harm.  Just someone who got caught up, as so many of us do, in a particular mind loop.

 

 

For brother Apech

 

He´s a cool white cat,

who knows where it´s at.

He´s done lots of Egyptian study,

I´m lucky he´s my buddy.

 

 

He's done a lot of Egyptian study

yet never talks of Bastet, buddy.

What kind of cool white cat

is that?      

[Taomeow]

9 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

 

I guess many here would not count vaccines as an improvement  ....   but I would cite 'non invasive  diagnosis  '  (like ultrasound )   and insulin  for diabetics .   Fortunately for me though , I am neither diabetic nor pregnant . 

 

I am not aware of diagnostics becoming less rather than more invasive...  depends on what you're comparing them to and what you know about the ones perceived as non-invasive that are in reality anything but.

 

E.g., ultrasound in  pregnancy is mighty controversial (and if you haven't heard about it, there's a reason for that...  we hear what the establishment wants us to hear, everything else gets swept under the rug...  it's just that some of us have stumbled over that rug and developed a habit of lifting it to see what lies beneath before venturing a step.)  A fetus is extremely sensitive.  Some of the concerns are neurological effects (exposure could affect fetal brain development or neuronal migration, based on animal studies), thermal effects (risk of local tissue heating, particularly near bone), cavitation effects (microscopic gas bubbles forming and collapsing in tissues, damaging molecules and cells), intrauterine growth restriction (observational studies noted a statistical correlation), and subtle long-term effects (concerns regarding increased risks for conditions like autism, childhood cancers, speech delays, etc.).  It's just one example, but there are many "non-invasive" diagnostic procedures that are only non-invasive because the invasion is not immediately obvious.  

 

As for insulin -- that was discovered over a hundred years ago...  Diabetes, in most cases, could be prevented or cured with better lifestyle and (especially) dietary choices.  But the money isn't in that.  Hence the current approach -- to pretty much everything.   

[liminal_luke]

49 minutes ago, Taomeow said:

 

He's done a lot of Egyptian study

yet never talks of Bastet, buddy.

What kind of cool white cat

is that?      

 

Cool cats rarely follow rules,

or get good grades in public schools.

They cultivate an air of mystery,

not for them the one two three.

So Apech´s drinking wine in Portugal,

and not concerned with us at all.

Let alone the great cat Bastet,

who surely deserves her own sonnet.

 

meow

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Thursday at 09:54 PM by liminal_luke

[Apech]

1 hour ago, liminal_luke said:

 

Cool cats rarely follow rules,

or get good grades in public schools.

They cultivate an air of mystery,

not for them the one two three.

So Apech´s drinking wine in Portugal,

and not concerned with us at all.

Let alone the great cat Bastet,

who surely deserves her own sonnet.

 

meow

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bravo.

[Mark Foote]

50 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

Cool cats rarely follow rules,

or get good grades in public schools.

They cultivate an air of mystery,

not for them the one two three.

So Apech´s drinking wine in Portugal,

and not concerned with us at all.

Let alone the great cat Bastet,

who surely deserves her own sonnet.

 

meow

 

A Bastet case, I have become

reading sonnets, having fun

The port is good, so they declare

in Portugal, some cat is there

who sweeps a tail across the rug

and makes a toy of some poor bug

 

photo Jon Bodsworth

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Apech]

What’s this thread about, again?

 

lol

 

(already multiple splits from original)

[Taomeow]

8 minutes ago, Apech said:

What’s this thread about, again?

 

lol

 

(already multiple splits from original)

 

[kakapo]

Ultimately you can get results you can objectively document and record, or you can't.  

 

There are lots of systems which produce subjective results. 

 

There are few which provide objective results. 

 

[Sanity Check]

13 hours ago, Taomeow said:

 

E.g., ultrasound in  pregnancy is mighty controversial (and if you haven't heard about it, there's a reason for that...  we hear what the establishment wants us to hear, everything else gets swept under the rug...  it's just that some of us have stumbled over that rug and developed a habit of lifting it to see what lies beneath before venturing a step.)  A fetus is extremely sensitive.  Some of the concerns are neurological effects (exposure could affect fetal brain development or neuronal migration, based on animal studies), thermal effects (risk of local tissue heating, particularly near bone)

 

 

 

.Ultrasound is cool.

 

 

[Cobie]

 

22 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

A Bastet case, …

 a Basket case 

 

 

Edited Friday at 10:00 PM by Cobie

[Cobie]

Look, now he’s dyed his hair 

(probably so Nungali can’t find him) but the grumpy look gives him away.

 

 

Edited Friday at 06:53 PM by Cobie

[Apech]

4 minutes ago, Cobie said:

Look, now he’s died his hair 

(probably so Nungali can’t find him) but the grumpy look gives him away.

 

 

 

I had a cat that looked just like that - he died a couple of weeks ago.

 

 

[Cobie]

I'm sorry for your loss.

 

Edited Friday at 06:26 PM by Cobie

[Apech]

1 hour ago, Cobie said:

I'm sorry for your loss.

 

 Thanks I miss him.  We had six cats but only one left

[Cobie]

I’m so sorry. Sending you love. 

 

 

[ChiDragon]

On 10/22/2025 at 10:54 AM, Taomeow said:

  We are trained to believe statements we are told originate from "Science."  "Trust the Science" absolutely equals "In God We Trust"

Some people are trained to believe the statements originated from "Science." Perhaps some might be believing it blindly like believing in God. Some are believing in Science with reasoning to support it. Some believed it was because it was proven by scientific method proofs. In the other hand, believing in God is a spiritual belief. It requires no proofs but faith. Finally, believing in the TCM or any martial arts system is like believing and having faith in God. Believing them require no proofs as long one thinks it works. Hence, one can explain it any way that one wants to and make belief for those who wish to believe it. These beliefs may spread out faster than the speed of sound. However, people with different education level will believe them in a different way for granted. 

Something works may be good enough for the sake of one's satisfaction. Some may be happy to believe what they had been told. Some might want to believe it with some proofs. Some might want to believe it by experiencing with one's own conclusion. At last, some might want  to experience it and research to get some facts convincing oneself to believe it. IMO There should be no doubt believing in Science with reasoning proofs by the scientific method. Believing is wise to believe in something by logical reasoning without any doubt or preconceived ideas. We should always consider what we are reading or told with an open mind.

 

[Nungali]

On 10/24/2025 at 10:49 AM, Apech said:

What’s this thread about, again?

 

lol

 

(already multiple splits from original)

 

It was about   our views on science, scientists and scientism 

 

Then there was a comment about 'life sciences '  .  Then we were told there is 'no such thing as a scientist ' .  Then a shifting terms claim about science being this ... no that ... no actually its  ... ( what was it now ? unpopoular .... not nice ... not currently 'politically correct ' ... or something    ?  )  . Then a diversion into  a claim from science journalism . Then  there was a complaint or something like that about the thread not commenting only on life sciences  ( even though the title said different ) .  Then Luke came in to kick it in the shins  (  not his brother this time    )  .  Then an indulgent poem that smacked of discordian interpretation  of the 'philosophy' of Hassan i Sabbah     ( 'nothing is true , all is permissible  ' )  by a smug cat .  Then some info about frying an unborn baby with microwaves .   Then  ......  cats  . 

 

Thats what the internet does ....  eventually ,   its all about  cats  . 

 

 

Then I came back and said  ... say  ... 

 

Science is a good approach , especially for all you post alternative nut jobs that  give more reality to your own internal fantasies . 

 

Scientists  are good and bad , like most groups of people ... except  for those 'save the planet' environmental scientists ... they are 'cool '  ( like  ultrasound is 'cool'  ... apparently , but I dont why ) . and scientism ? Well, that just sucks  and one will realize why , if they can tell the difference between the three terms . 

 

And now I depart the thread to avoid the upcoming disdainful stares and comments  ..... 

 

 

.

Edited Saturday at 09:03 PM by Nungali

[Mark Foote]

Watch out for nutrition science:

 

 

... The stand out example for me is nutrition science. A lot of the big, obvious effects have been picked through and now so much of it is simmering in noise with strong incentives to find various different things by getting significance. Alcohol/chocolate/coffee does, doesn’t, does, doesn’t, does, doesn’t cause increased mortality. I don’t know how we could expect that discipline to turn around. There is good work being done there here and there, but so much of it is GIGO. I have a paper in the works trying to sort out how we can know if a field is producing knowledge or just chasing ghosts . . .

(Joe Bak-Coleman, collective behavior scientist at the University of Washington)

 

 

... Regarding nutrition science: yeah, this is another field where there’s endless crap being hyped. Also related areas in health science such as that stupid cold-shower study or all the crappy sleep research. I don’t have any sense of an escape route for all this. On one hand, nutrition, health behavior, exercise, sleep, etc., are hugely important and worth scientific study. On the other hand, these fields are so rotten, with really incompetent or unethical people deeply embedded within the system of academic publication and news media promotion, that sometimes it just seems entirely hopeless.

 

(blog "Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science", today's entry by Andrew Gelman, professor of statistics and political science at Columbia University)

 

 

[Nungali]

At least 'nutritional science'  stopped boys going blind from masturbating by making them eat Kellogg's Cornflakes 

 

https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/32042/corn-flakes-were-invented-part-anti-masturbation-crusade

 

 

 

 

It worked  ( scientifically )   like this ; 

 

'' Right then Johhny !  If you dont stop doing ......   that ..... I will make you eat corn flakes for breakfast every day !  ''

[Nungali]

Correction .  Not  just blindness but apparently also  ; 

 

'' ... general infirmity, defective development, mood swings, fickleness, bashfulness, boldness, bad posture, stiff joints, fondness for spicy foods, acne, palpitations, and epilepsy. ''

 

- at least he got one of them right      

[Master Logray]

When we say scientists, what do we mean?   I suppose only research scientists are scientists.   Engineer, doctors and other professionals are not scientists?

[RobB]

I heard an interesting podcast with Iain McGilchrist a couple of months ago. Amongst many other things he observed that biological, and particularly medical, sciences were still stuck in a particular way of thinking and modelling that likened biological processes/interactions to machines. A point he made was that there has never been a machine on this planet that wasn't built by ourselves ('Ancient Aliens' aside) - modelling biology as machinery is reductive and a way for humans to start to grasp the complexity of the situation rather than saying anything about the actual nature of the organisms in question. He also pointed out that physics has understood the equivalence of energy and matter for over a century and none (very little?) of that thinking has crossed over into mainstream bioscience yet.

 

I work with scientists all the time. They're people just like all of us, making their way in the world. A lot of them are lovely, some less so. They all have bills to pay and many have families to feed. I'm fortunate to be in an academic environment. Once commercial pressures get applied people might behave differently. I'm not sure that's unique to scientists though. 

[liminal_luke]

On 25/10/2025 at 2:27 PM, Mark Foote said:

Watch out for nutrition science:

 

 

They are few and far between, but a few nutrition scientists are conducting studies that confirm my beliefs about what is good to eat.  These folks are OK!  It´s the other ones I can´t take.