patrick.net

Martin Kulldorff
@MartinKulldorff
During the 16th century reformation, many lay people understood the bible better than most priests.

During the 21st century pandemic, many lay people understood science better than most scientists.

Long terms implications will be equally profound.
August 10th 2022

Ezra Levant 🍁🚛
@ezralevant
36m
Nobel laureate Richard Feynman said science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts. A scientist never trusts anything without testing it. What you really want is obedience to ruling elites who want to be above criticism. Maybe start by not calling critics “stupid”

forget "being the science," apparently the UN now claims to OWN it
more adventures in "saying the quiet part out loud"




... had i posted a quote from an unknown speaker that stated:

“we own the science and we think that the world should know it…”
how many of you would have presumed that it MUST be over the top pastiche and that no one would possibly mistake for a sincere position on a topic?

because this is no joke. those are her precise words. please give her a listen. it’s amazing how much quiet part you can say out loud in 42 seconds.

1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility
More than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist's experiments, and more than half have failed to reproduce their own experiments. Those are some of the telling figures that emerged from Nature's survey of 1,576 researchers who took a brief online questionnaire on reproducibility in research.
The data reveal sometimes-contradictory attitudes towards reproducibility. Although 52% of those surveyed agree that there is a significant 'crisis' of reproducibility, less than 31% think that failure to reproduce published results means that the result is probably wrong, and most say that they still trust the published literature.

ZUBY:
@ZubyMusic
Nov 16
What was the silliest, least scientific 'pandemic' policy?

The U.S. government is engaged in genocide.

Most academics are required to raise a large portion of their salary through government and corporate “grants”.

Any academic who questions the genocide will not be funded by the government or corporate sector.

Therefore no academics question the genocide — and if they do they’ll be fired.

That’s how the academic world arrives at consensus these days.

The wholesale assault on science, by many on the political left, over the last several years, is astonishing. They seem to believe that:

• mercury and aluminum are magically transmogrified from known neurotoxins into beneficial vitamins when injected into children;

• biological sex is socially constructed and chromosomes are a vast right wing conspiracy theory; and that

• genetically modified mRNA shots, that have never worked in humans, suddenly became “safe and effective” because of the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.

Therefore no academics question the genocide — and if they do they’ll be fired.

That’s how the academic world arrives at consensus these days.

um, you guys, is anyone else maybe a teensy bit worried that if “the best way to get people to follow the science is not to explain the science” that probably it’s not really very good science?

i’m just a kitten and not a big important president of the european research council like miss maria or anything, but that sounds kinda suspect…

In the last interview of his life (1996), astronomer Carl Sagan gave an uncannily prescient warning of the dangers that arise when you cannot ask skeptical scientific questions of those in authority. Watch and ask yourself: was he right?